Rating of Perceived Exertion for Quantification of the Intensity of Resistance Exercise
Shinichiro Morishita1,2*, Shinya Yamauchi1, Chiharu Fujisawa1 and Kazuhisa Domen2
1Department of Rehabilitation, Hyogo College of Medicine Hospital, Nishinomiya, Japan
2Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan
- *Corresponding Author:
- Shinichiro Morishita
Department of Rehabilitation
Hyogo College of Medicine Hospital
1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya
Hyogo 663-8501, Japan
E-mail: [email protected]
Received Date November 15, 2013; Accepted Date: December 20, 2013; Published Date: December 25, 2013
Citation: Morishita S, Yamauchi S, Fujisawa C, Domen K (2013) Rating of Perceived Exertion for Quantification of the Intensity of Resistance Exercise. Int J Phys Med Rehabil 1:172. doi: 10.4172/2329-9096.1000172
Copyright: © 2013 Morishita S, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Visit for more related articles at International Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is widely used in exercise tests using cycle ergometers (incremental aerobic exercise) for patients with cardiovascular and metabolic diseases such as hypertension and type 2 diabetes. On the other hand, RPE has also been used widely for determining the intensity of resistance exercise for healthy subjects. RPE anchoring is associated with percentage of 1 repetition maximum or the percentage of maximal voluntary contraction. This short communication explains a concrete method of RPE to quantify the intensity of resistance exercise. Physicians, physical therapists, and medical staff should use RPE for determining the intensity of resistance exercise in clinical practise.
Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) has been widely used for determining the intensity of resistance exercise because it is related to physiological markers of the stress response to exercise [1-3]. The guidelines of the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommended monitoring cardiovascular responses to resistance exercise, including the heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and perceived exertion, and using the RPE to set the intensity of strength training in both young and older adults [4,5]. However, physicians, physical therapists, and medical staff engaged in rehabilitation are largely unfamiliar with the use of the RPE for adjusting the intensity of resistance exercise. This article reviews the use of several forms of RPE for resistance exercise, including the Borg Category Ratio (Borg CR-10), Borg 15-point RPE scale, and OMNIResistance Exercise Scale (OMNI-RES).
RPE can be used to track the progress of training in resistance exercise and may also be appropriate for quantifying the intensity of resistance exercise and prescribing an appropriate program [6,7]. A number of recent investigations have indicated that RPE is related to various indices of resistance exercise intensity [8,9]. Borg CR-10,0 Borg 15-point RPE scale, [10-12] and OMNI-RES  have been used as metrics of perceived exertion during resistance exercise.
Borg Category Ratio (Borg CR-10)
Borg CR-10 has been used to assess the RPE during resistance exercise via a modified 0-10 category ratio [6,13,14]. This scale is presented in Table 1. After completing each working set, the subjects were asked to rate their perceived exertion on the CR-10 scale by choosing any number on the scale to rate their overall effort during the resistance exercise. A rating of 0 was to be associated with no effort, i.e. rest, and a rating of 10 with maximal effort, i.e. the most stressful exercise performed. The Borg CR-10 scale has been used to quantify the perception of physical exertion . Many studies have validated the CR-10 scale for measurement of the intensity of resistance exercise [7,9,13,15-21].
||Very, very easy
Table 1: Borg Category Ratio (Borg CR-10).
Borg 15-point RPE Scale
The Borg 15-point RPE scale is a modified 6-20-point RPE scale [22,23]. This scale is presented in Table 2. The Borg 15-point RPE scale has been used to measure the level of physical strain or perceived exertion . The subjects were instructed to use any number on the scale to rate their overall effort during resistance exercise. A rating of 6 was to be associated with no exertion, i.e. rest, and a rating of 20 with maximal exertion, i.e. the most stressful exercise performed. Many studies have validated the Borg 15-point RPE for use in measuring the intensity of resistance exercise [22-29]. The rating on the Borg 15-point RPE scale increased as the intensity of resistance exercise increased.
||No Exertion at all
Table 2: Borg 15-point RPE scale.
OMNI-Resistance Exercise Scale (OMNI-RES)
The OMNI-RES was developed as a substitute for Borg’s RPE scale . This scale is presented in Figure 1. The subjects were instructed to report their RPEs at the end of resistance exercise as numbers on the OMNI-RES (0-10) scale. The subjects were instructed to use any number on the scale to rate their overall muscular effort, and the investigators used the same question, ‘How hard do you feel your muscles are working?’, each time. An anchoring procedure was included that required the subjects to assign the perceived level of exertion associated with lifting a very light weight as a scale rating of ‘Extremely easy’ and the feeling of exertion associated with lifting a very heavy weight as a scale rating of ‘Extremely hard’ . Many studies have reported the OMNI-RES to be an accurate and reliable tool for selecting the appropriate intensity of resistance exercise for improving muscular fitness [3,30-37]. Another previous study reported that the OMNI-RES exhibits a high level of construct validity, indicating that it measures the same properties of exertion as the Borg RPE scale during resistance exercise and suggesting that the 2 scales can be used interchangeably in the quantification of resistance exercise .
Figure 1: OMNI Perceived Exertion Scale for Resistance Exercise.
Different Methods of Anchoring the RPE
Anchoring RPE on percentage of 1 repetition maximum (%1RM) or the percentage of maximal voluntary contraction (%MVC).
Most studies of RPE anchoring have investigated the relationship between the RPE and the %1RM or %MVC [9,17,19,20,22,26,28,35,37-39]. This relationship shows in Figure 2. Many such reports used similar study designs in which the subjects were asked about their perceived exertion after voluntary contraction at different target intensities, and all found that the RPE increased as the %1 RM or %MVC increased. In addition, the perceived exertion was significantly lesser than the equivalent value on the CR-10 scale for each intensity [9,39]. This means that a value of ‘1’ on the CR-10 scale represents <10%MVC.
Figure 2: Ratings of perceived exertion versus contraction intensity (10- 90% MVC) during isometric contraction.
Anchoring RPE on the Number of Repetitions
Other studies have investigated the relationship between the RPE and the number of repetitions of resistance exercise [3,40,41]. These studies used similar study designs in which the subjects were asked about their perceived exertion following different numbers of repetitions of resistance exercise at a target voluntary contraction intensity and found that the RPE increased with the number of repetitions at the target voluntary contraction intensity [3,40,41].
Anchoring RPE on the Duration of Voluntary Isometric Contraction
Other studies have investigated the relationship between the RPE and the duration of voluntary isometric muscle contraction [42,43]. The RPE increased with the duration of contraction at a constant %MVC [42,43].
Several Factors Affect the RPE
Effect of age on the RPE
Several studies have investigated the differences in RPE during resistance exercise between older and younger people [44,45]. These studies found that the perceived exertion level during the same resistance exercise was significantly greater in older than in younger adults [44,45].
Sex differences in RPE
Many studies have investigated the differences in the perceived level of exertion during resistance exercise between women and men with conflicting results [18-20,39,40,46,47]. Women rated exercise performed at the same intensity as requiring less effort than reported by men . Similarly, women displayed significantly higher power function exponents for the same perceived exertion rating than did men . In contrast, in another study the increase in the RPE during resistance exercise was significantly greater in women than in men, although only during single-joint endurance exercise . However, other reports have shown no difference in perceived exertion during resistance exercise between men and women. [19,20,39,46].
Effect of Concentric vs. Eccentric Muscle Contraction on the RPE
Several studies have investigated the differences in the effects of concentric and eccentric muscle contraction on the RPE [48,49]. These studies have shown that concentric exercise elicits a greater perceptual (higher RPE) response than does eccentric exercise at the same absolute workload [48,49].
The RPE of Active Muscle vs. the Overall RPE
Several studies have investigated the differences between the RPE values of the active muscle and the overall perception of exertion and found the RPE of the active muscle to be greater than the overall RPE during resistance exercise [30,38].
Effect of the %1 Repetition Maximum (RM) on RPE during Equal Total Work
Several authors have examined the effect of the %1RM muscle activity on the RPE during resistance exercises requiring equal total work [13,23,25,38,50]. The intensity and number of repetitions of a resistance exercise were varied to produce programs requiring equal amounts of total work, e.g. 4 repetitions were performed at 90%1RM, 6 repetitions at 60%1RM, or 12 repetitions at 30%1RM . Performing fewer repetitions at a higher intensity was perceived to be more difficult than performing more repetitions at a lower intensity, i.e. a high %1RM produced higher RPE scores than did a low %1RM [13,23,25]. However, another report showed no difference in the mean RPE between exercise at 50%1RM and 75%1RM .
Effect of the Interval Length on the RPE
The effect of the length of the rest interval on the RPE during a resistance exercise session has been examined [31,51,52]. The RPE during a resistance exercise session is greater for shorter rest intervals than for longer rest intervals [31,51,52].
Use of RPE in Children
A few studies have used RPE in 10-14-year-old boys and girls to examine the validity of perceived exertion in children and found that RPE was a valid measure of the intensity of resistance exercise in children [53-55].
Application of the RPE in Patients with Various Conditions
The RPE has recently been used in studies of resistance exercise in patients with various diseases, including peripheral artery disease  and multiple sclerosis,  as well as in postmenopausal women .
RPE has often been used for determining the intensity of resistance exercise in healthy subjects. Many reports have shown the validity of RPE for quantification of the effort required during resistance exercise. The RPE during resistance exercise is an inexpensive and convenient measure that can be used anywhere and could thus be available in the hospital, nursing home, and home settings for patients with medical conditions. Physicians, physical therapists, and medical staff engaged in rehabilitation should be aware of the usefulness of the RPE during resistance exercise.
- Lagally KM, Robertson RJ, Gallagher KI, Gearhart R, Goss FL (2002) Ratings of perceived exertion during low- and high-intensity resistance exercise by young adults. Percept Mot Skills 94: 723-731.
- Lagally KM, McCaw ST, Young GT, Medema HC, Thomas DQ (2004) Ratings of perceived exertion and muscle activity during the bench press exercise in recreational and novice lifters. J Strength Cond Res 18: 359-364.
- Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Rutkowski J, Lenz B, Dixon C, et al. (2003) Concurrent validation of the OMNI perceived exertion scale for resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35: 333-341.
- Williams MA, Haskell WL, Ades PA, Amsterdam EA, Bittner V, et al. (2007) Resistance exercise in individuals with and without cardiovascular disease: 2007 update: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology and Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism. Circulation 116: 572-584.
- Pollock ML, Franklin BA, Balady GJ, Chaitman BL, Fleg JL et al. (2000) AHA Science Advisory. Resistance exercise in individuals with and without cardiovascular disease: benefits, rationale, safety, and prescription: An advisory from the Committee on Exercise, Rehabilitation, and Prevention, Council on Clinical Cardiology, American Heart Association. Circulation 101: 828-833.
- Hackett DA, Johnson NA, Halaki M, Chow CM (2012) A novel scale to assess resistance-exercise effort. J Sports Sci 30: 1405-1413.
- Buckley JP, Borg GA (2011) Borg's scales in strength training; from theory to practice in young and older adults. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 36: 682-692.
- Lagally KM, Robertson RJ (2006) Construct validity of the OMNI resistance exercise scale. J Strength Cond Res 20: 252-256.
- Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Campy RM, Salfetnikov Y, Bright A (2002) The effects of voluntary contraction effort on quadriceps femoris electromyogram median frequency in humans: a muscle and sex comparison. Eur J Appl Physiol 87: 448-455.
- Borg G (1998) Borg's perceived exertion and pain scales. Human kinetics.
- Borg G (1990) Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. Scand J Work Environ Health 16 Suppl 1: 55-58.
- Borg GA (1982) Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 14: 377-381.
- Day ML, McGuigan MR, Brice G, Foster C (2004) Monitoring exercise intensity during resistance training using the session RPE scale. J Strength Cond Res 18: 353-358.
- Sweet TW, Foster C, McGuigan MR, Brice G (2004) Quantitation of resistance training using the session rating of perceived exertion method. J Strength Cond Res 18: 796-802.
- Li KW, Yu R (2011) Assessment of grip force and subjective hand force exertion under handedness and postural conditions. Appl Ergon 42: 929-933.
- McGorry RW, Lin JH, Dempsey PG, Casey JS (2010) Accuracy of the Borg CR10 scale for estimating grip forces associated with hand tool tasks. J Occup Environ Hyg 7: 298-306.
- Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Campy RM (2003) Perceived exertion and maximal quadriceps femoris muscle strength during dynamic knee extension exercise in young adult males and females. Eur J Appl Physiol 89: 150-156.
- Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Campy RM (2004) Gender differences in perceived exertion during fatiguing knee extensions. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36: 109-117.
- Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Campy RM, Salfetnikov Y, Bright A (2001) The effects of voluntary contraction intensity and gender on perceived exertion during isokinetic quadriceps exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol 84: 221-226.
- Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Erikson WH (2000) Perceived exertion during isometric quadriceps contraction. A comparison between men and women. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 40: 319-326.
- Andersen LL, Andersen CH, Mortensen OS, Poulsen OM, Bjørnlund IB, et al. (2010) Muscle activation and perceived loading during rehabilitation exercises: comparison of dumbbells and elastic resistance. Phys Ther 90: 538-549.
- Row BS, Knutzen KM, Skogsberg NJ (2012) Regulating explosive resistance training intensity using the rating of perceived exertion. J Strength Cond Res 26: 664-671.
- Gearhart RE, Goss FL, Lagally KM, Jakicic JM, Gallagher J, et al. (2001) Standardized scaling procedures for rating perceived exertion during resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 15: 320-325.
- Eston R, Evans HJ (2009) The validity of submaximal ratings of perceived exertion to predict one repetition maximum. J Sports Sci Med 8: 567-573.
- Gearhart RF Jr, Goss FL, Lagally KM, Jakicic JM, Gallagher J, et al. (2002) Ratings of perceived exertion in active muscle during high-intensity and low-intensity resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 16: 87-91.
- Lagally KM, Amorose AJ (2007) The validity of using prior ratings of perceive exertion to regulate resistance exercise intensity. Percept Mot Skills 104: 534-542.
- Lagally KM, Costigan EM (2004) Anchoring procedures in reliability of ratings of perceived exertion during resistance exercise. Percept Mot Skills 98: 1285-1295.
- Lagally KM, Robertson RJ, Gallagher KI, Goss FL, Jakicic JM, et al. (2002) Perceived exertion, electromyography, and blood lactate during acute bouts of resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 552-559.
- Tiggemann CL, Korzenowski AL, Brentano MA, Tartaruga MP, Alberton CL, et al. (2010) Perceived exertion in different strength exercise loads in sedentary, active, and trained adults. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2032-2041.
- Colado JC, Garcia-Masso X, Triplett TN, Flandez J, Borreani S, et al. (2012) Concurrent validation of the OMNI-resistance exercise scale of perceived exertion with Thera-band resistance bands. J Strength Cond Res 26: 3018-3024.
- Farah BQ, Lima AH, Lins-Filho OL, Souza DJ, Silva GQ, et al. (2012) Effects of rest interval length on rating of perceived exertion during a multiple-set resistance exercise. Percept Mot Skills 115: 273-282.
- Gearhart RF Jr, Lagally KM, Riechman SE, Andrews RD, Robertson RJ (2008) RPE at relative intensities after 12 weeks of resistance-exercise training by older adults. Percept Mot Skills 106: 893-903.
- Gearhart RF Jr, Lagally KM, Riechman SE, Andrews RD, Robertson RJ (2009) Strength tracking using the OMNI resistance exercise scale in older men and women. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1011-1015.
- Gearhart RF Jr, Lagally KM, Riechman SE, Andrews RD, Robertson RJ (2011) Safety of using the adult OMNI Resistance Exercise Scale to determine 1-RM in older men and women. Percept Mot Skills 113: 671-676.
- Lagally KM, Amorose AJ, Rock B (2009) Selection of resistance exercise intensity using ratings of perceived exertion from the OMNI-RES. Percept Mot Skills 108: 573-586.
- Lins-Filho Ode L, Robertson RJ, Farah BQ, Rodrigues SL, Cyrino ES, et al. (2012) Effects of exercise intensity on rating of perceived exertion during a multiple-set resistance exercise session. J Strength Cond Res 26: 466-472.
- Naclerio F, Rodríguez-Romo G, Barriopedro-Moro MI, Jiménez A, Alvar BA, et al. (2011) Control of resistance training intensity by the OMNI perceived exertion scale. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1879-1888.
- Duncan MJ, Al-Nakeeb Y, Scurr J (2006) Perceived exertion is related to muscle activity during leg extension exercise. Res Sports Med 14: 179-189.
- Pincivero DM, Polen RR, Byrd BN (2010) Gender and contraction mode on perceived exertion. Int J Sports Med 31: 359-363.
- O'Connor PJ, Poudevigne MS, Pasley JD (2002) Perceived exertion responses to novel elbow flexor eccentric action in women and men. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 862-868.
- Testa M, Noakes TD, Desgorces FD (2012) Training state improves the relationship between rating of perceived exertion and relative exercise volume during resistance exercises. J Strength Cond Res 26: 2990-2996.
- Champagne A, Descarreaux M, Lafond D (2009) Comparison between elderly and young males' lumbopelvic extensor muscle endurance assessed during a clinical isometric back extension test. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 32: 521-526.
- Pincivero DM, Gear WS (2000) Quadriceps activation and perceived exertion during a high intensity, steady state contraction to failure. Muscle Nerve 23: 514-520.
- Allman BL, Rice CL (2003) Perceived exertion is elevated in old age during an isometric fatigue task. Eur J Appl Physiol 89: 191-197.
- Pincivero DM (2011) Older adults underestimate RPE and knee extensor torque as compared with young adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 43: 171-180.
- Robertson RJ, Moyna NM, Sward KL, Millich NB, Goss FL, et al. (2000) Gender comparison of RPE at absolute and relative physiological criteria. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32: 2120-2129.
- Springer BK, Pincivero DM (2010) Differences in ratings of perceived exertion between the sexes during single-joint and whole-body exercise. J Sports Sci 28: 75-82.
- Hollander DB, Durand RJ, Trynicki JL, Larock D, Castracane VD, et al. (2003) RPE, pain, and physiological adjustment to concentric and eccentric contractions. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35: 1017-1025.
- Hollander DB, Kilpatrick MW, Ramadan ZG, Reeves GV, Francois M, et al. (2008) Load rather than contraction type influences rate of perceived exertion and pain. J Strength Cond Res 22: 1184-1193.
- Lodo L, Moreira A, Zavanela PM, Newton MJ, McGuigan MR, et al. (2012) Is there a relationship between the total volume of load lifted in bench press exercise and the rating of perceived exertion? J Sports Med Phys Fitness 52: 483-488.
- Pincivero DM, Campy RM, Karunakara RG (2004) The effects of rest interval and resistance training on quadriceps femoris muscle. Part II: EMG and perceived exertion. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 44: 224-232.
- Senna G, Willardson JM, de Salles BF, Scudese E, Carneiro F, et al. (2011) The effect of rest interval length on multi and single-joint exercise performance and perceived exertion. J Strength Cond Res 25: 3157-3162.
- Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Andreacci JL, Dubé JJ, Rutkowski JJ, et al. (2005) Validation of the Children's OMNI-Resistance Exercise Scale of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37: 819-826.
- Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Aaron DJ, Gairola A, Kowallis RA, et al. (2008) One repetition maximum prediction models for children using the OMNI RPE Scale. J Strength Cond Res 22: 196-201.
- Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Aaron DJ, Nagle EF, Gallagher M Jr, et al. (2009) Concurrent muscle hurt and perceived exertion of children during resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 1146-1154.
- Andrade Lima AH, Farah BQ, Rodrigues LB, Miranda AS, Rodrigues SL, et al. (2013) Low-intensity resistance exercise does not affect cardiac autonomic modulation in patients with peripheral artery disease. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 68: 632-637.
- Kiselka A, Greisberger A, Heller M (2013) Perception of muscular effort in multiple sclerosis. NeuroRehabilitation 32: 415-423.
- Thiebaud RS, Loenneke JP, Fahs CA, Rossow LM, Kim D, et al. (2013) The effects of elastic band resistance training combined with blood flow restriction on strength, total bone-free lean body mass and muscle thickness in postmenopausal women. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 33: 344-352.