Predicting Cardiorespiratory Fitness with a Cycle Ergometry Equation in Middle-Aged and Older Adults at Low and High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease.

Pierre Boulay,Ahmed Ghachem,James J McCormick,Glen P Kenny
{"title":"Predicting Cardiorespiratory Fitness with a Cycle Ergometry Equation in Middle-Aged and Older Adults at Low and High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease.","authors":"Pierre Boulay,Ahmed Ghachem,James J McCormick,Glen P Kenny","doi":"10.1249/mss.0000000000003761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\r\nLow cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) has consistently been associated with an increased risk of premature mortality and has been shown to be comparable to traditional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in terms of health outcomes. Thus, the purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to determine the accuracy of commonly proposed cycling ergometry equations to predict maximum oxygen uptake (pV̇O2max) in middle-aged and older adults and, 2) to assess if the accuracy is impacted by the presence of CVD risk factors.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA total of 1255 participants (62.4 ± 6.9 years; 62.9% male) were included. V̇O2max was measured during an incremental maximal exercise test (IMET) on a cycle ergometer. In addition, three non-gender and gender-specific cycle ergometry equations (Storer et al. 1990, de Souza et al. 2015 and (FRIEND) Kokkinos et al. 2018) were used to pV̇O2max.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nBoth FRIEND and Storer equations pV̇O2max with a low relative bias for both non-gender-specific (-0.81 ± 12.9%; -0.31 ± 13.1%, respectively) and gender-specific (Women: -0.03 ± 13.6%; -3.31 ± 13.3%, Men: -045 ± 11.5%; 0.61 ± 11.5%, respectively) equations. Bland-Altman results also showed no difference between measured and pV̇O2max with excellent accuracy based on the Cb (0.99 and 1.0) and Lin's CCC (0.91 and 0.92) scores for both the FRIEND and Storer equations, respectively. The coefficient of determination (R2) was high (0.84-0.88) displaying good accuracy with low RMSE values.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nBoth the Storer and FRIEND-cycle ergometry equations predicted CRF with good accuracy in adults at low and high risk of CVD. Using the gender-specific equations slightly improved the accuracy, however the FRIEND equation performed better overall. Therefore, the FRIEND equation provides an attractive and simple alternative to assess CRF in adults when the direct measurement of V̇O2max is not feasible.","PeriodicalId":18500,"journal":{"name":"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0000000000003761","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PURPOSE Low cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) has consistently been associated with an increased risk of premature mortality and has been shown to be comparable to traditional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in terms of health outcomes. Thus, the purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to determine the accuracy of commonly proposed cycling ergometry equations to predict maximum oxygen uptake (pV̇O2max) in middle-aged and older adults and, 2) to assess if the accuracy is impacted by the presence of CVD risk factors. METHODS A total of 1255 participants (62.4 ± 6.9 years; 62.9% male) were included. V̇O2max was measured during an incremental maximal exercise test (IMET) on a cycle ergometer. In addition, three non-gender and gender-specific cycle ergometry equations (Storer et al. 1990, de Souza et al. 2015 and (FRIEND) Kokkinos et al. 2018) were used to pV̇O2max. RESULTS Both FRIEND and Storer equations pV̇O2max with a low relative bias for both non-gender-specific (-0.81 ± 12.9%; -0.31 ± 13.1%, respectively) and gender-specific (Women: -0.03 ± 13.6%; -3.31 ± 13.3%, Men: -045 ± 11.5%; 0.61 ± 11.5%, respectively) equations. Bland-Altman results also showed no difference between measured and pV̇O2max with excellent accuracy based on the Cb (0.99 and 1.0) and Lin's CCC (0.91 and 0.92) scores for both the FRIEND and Storer equations, respectively. The coefficient of determination (R2) was high (0.84-0.88) displaying good accuracy with low RMSE values. CONCLUSIONS Both the Storer and FRIEND-cycle ergometry equations predicted CRF with good accuracy in adults at low and high risk of CVD. Using the gender-specific equations slightly improved the accuracy, however the FRIEND equation performed better overall. Therefore, the FRIEND equation provides an attractive and simple alternative to assess CRF in adults when the direct measurement of V̇O2max is not feasible.
用周期几何方程预测中老年心血管疾病低、高风险人群的心肺健康
低心肺适能(CRF)一直与过早死亡风险增加相关,并且在健康结果方面已被证明与传统心血管疾病(CVD)危险因素相当。因此,本研究的目的有两个:1)确定常用的循环几何方程预测中老年人最大摄氧量(pV * O2max)的准确性;2)评估其准确性是否受到心血管疾病危险因素的影响。方法共纳入1255例受试者(62.4±6.9岁;62.9%为男性)。在增量最大运动试验(IMET)中,在循环测力仪上测量V * O2max。此外,三个非性别和性别特定的周期几何方程(stower等人1990年,de Souza等人2015年和(FRIEND) Kokkinos等人2018年)被用于pV * O2max。结果FRIEND和stover方程pV * O2max均具有较低的相对偏倚(-0.81±12.9%;-0.31±13.1%)和性别差异(女性:-0.03±13.6%;-3.31±13.3%男性:-045±11.5%;分别为0.61±11.5%)方程。Bland-Altman结果还显示,基于FRIEND和stover方程的Cb(0.99和1.0)和Lin's CCC(0.91和0.92)得分,测量值和pV * O2max之间没有差异,准确度很高。测定系数(R2)高(0.84 ~ 0.88),具有较好的准确度和较低的RMSE值。结论Storer和FRIEND-cycle几何方程预测低、高风险CVD成人的CRF均具有较好的准确性。使用特定性别的方程略微提高了准确性,但FRIEND方程的总体表现更好。因此,当不能直接测量v_o2max时,FRIEND方程提供了一种有吸引力且简单的替代方法来评估成人的CRF。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信