Comparison of Peak Aerobic Capacity Between the Treadmill and a Skiing Ergometer

H. Nelson, A. Bosak, Russell Lowell, M. Mcdermott, Branden Ziebell, Moroni de Moors, Anna Blackley, Samuel J. Arter
{"title":"Comparison of Peak Aerobic Capacity Between the Treadmill and a Skiing Ergometer","authors":"H. Nelson, A. Bosak, Russell Lowell, M. Mcdermott, Branden Ziebell, Moroni de Moors, Anna Blackley, Samuel J. Arter","doi":"10.53520/jen2021.103101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Concept2 SkiErg is increasing in popularity and is widely used to provide a low impact total body workout. Because of these benefits, the SkiErg could be an ideal tool for fitness testing. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare VO2peak values elicited from a treadmill (TM) and SkiErg (SE) graded exercise test (GXT).\nMethods: Twenty-two averagely fit females completed 2 GXT protocols to volitional exhaustion on a TM and SE. Peak VO2, HR, VE, TTE, and RER were compared using paired-samples t-tests with significant differences at p≤0.05. Max RPE was compared using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test.\nResults: TM was significantly greater than SE for VO2peak (43.82±1.07 vs 33.97±5.01 ml/kg/min, p<0.01), HR (189±8 vs 182±11 bpm, p<0.01), RPE (18.91+1.11vs 17.26+2.03, p=0.02), VE (95.44±11.26 vs 86.21±2.90 L/min, p=0.015), and TTE (550.16+137.56 vs 391.86±81.20 sec, p<0.01). RER was significantly greater on the SE (1.16±0.08 vs 1.12±0.06, p=0.024).\nConclusion: Results suggest that TM elicits higher max values for VO2, HR, TTE, VE, and RPE compared to SE, while SE elicits a higher RER in the current population. SE could be used as an alternative mode of testing in averagely-fit females but does not directly compare to TM values.","PeriodicalId":73743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of exercise and nutrition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of exercise and nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53520/jen2021.103101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: The Concept2 SkiErg is increasing in popularity and is widely used to provide a low impact total body workout. Because of these benefits, the SkiErg could be an ideal tool for fitness testing. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare VO2peak values elicited from a treadmill (TM) and SkiErg (SE) graded exercise test (GXT). Methods: Twenty-two averagely fit females completed 2 GXT protocols to volitional exhaustion on a TM and SE. Peak VO2, HR, VE, TTE, and RER were compared using paired-samples t-tests with significant differences at p≤0.05. Max RPE was compared using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. Results: TM was significantly greater than SE for VO2peak (43.82±1.07 vs 33.97±5.01 ml/kg/min, p<0.01), HR (189±8 vs 182±11 bpm, p<0.01), RPE (18.91+1.11vs 17.26+2.03, p=0.02), VE (95.44±11.26 vs 86.21±2.90 L/min, p=0.015), and TTE (550.16+137.56 vs 391.86±81.20 sec, p<0.01). RER was significantly greater on the SE (1.16±0.08 vs 1.12±0.06, p=0.024). Conclusion: Results suggest that TM elicits higher max values for VO2, HR, TTE, VE, and RPE compared to SE, while SE elicits a higher RER in the current population. SE could be used as an alternative mode of testing in averagely-fit females but does not directly compare to TM values.
跑步机和滑雪仪峰值有氧能力的比较
简介:Concept2 SkiErg越来越受欢迎,被广泛用于提供低冲击的全身锻炼。由于这些好处,滑雪板可以成为健身测试的理想工具。因此,本研究的目的是比较从跑步机(TM)和SkiErg (SE)分级运动试验(GXT)中获得的vo2峰值。方法:22名平均健康的女性在TM和SE上完成2个GXT方案。峰值VO2、HR、VE、TTE、RER采用配对样本t检验,p≤0.05,差异有统计学意义。最大RPE比较采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验。结果:TM显著高于SE (vo2峰43.82±1.07 vs 33.97±5.01 ml/kg/min, p<0.01)、HR(189±8 vs 182±11 bpm, p<0.01)、RPE (18.91+1.11vs 17.26+2.03, p=0.02)、VE(95.44±11.26 vs 86.21±2.90 L/min, p=0.015)、TTE (550.16+137.56 vs 391.86±81.20 sec, p<0.01)。RER在SE组显著增高(1.16±0.08 vs 1.12±0.06,p=0.024)。结论:结果表明,与SE相比,TM可引起VO2、HR、TTE、VE和RPE的最大值,而SE可引起当前人群更高的RER。SE可以作为平均拟合女性的替代检验模式,但不能直接与TM值进行比较。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信