Measurement of Aerobic Capacity Using Mouthpiece vs. Mask for Data Collection
|Kelly Brooks* and J. Jay Dawes
|Department of Kinesiology, Texas A&M University, USA
|Corresponding Author :
Department of Kinesiology
Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi
TX 78412, (361) 825-2670, USA
|Received January 30, 2013; Accepted February 15, 2013; Published February 18, 2013
|Citation: Brooks K, Dawes JJ (2013) Measurement of Aerobic Capacity Using Mouthpiece vs. Mask for Data Collection. J Nov Physiother S2:002. doi:10.4172/2165-7025.S2-002
|Copyright: © 2013 Brooks K. 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.
Measurement of aerobic capacity is an important task that must be done accurately in order for data to be worthwhile. Measurement is traditionally obtained through the use of a nose-clip, mouthpiece, and headgear apparatus. This method of collecting gas has proven to be difficult due to the high incidence of losing the nose clip during exercise, the awkwardness and discomfort of the apparatus, and the loss of oral communication. This study compares this method with using a gas collection mask for physiological measurement. Masks have been avoided due to leakage that causes errors in data. Maximal and submaximal values for Ve, VO2, HR, and RER were compared for both methods of collection. Results show that the mask produced values equal to those of the mouthpiece, nose clip, and headgear. Significantly more discomfort, as well as influence on running economy, was reported with the headgear. The data show that leakage is not a significant problem. Based on preliminary studies and data from this study, using the mask is recommended. Data suggests that further studies look at facial shape, as well as masks of different size and material, with regards to eliminating any data errors occurring in the mask.