alexa A comparison of methods of predicting maximum oxygen uptake.
Physicaltherapy & Rehabilitation

Physicaltherapy & Rehabilitation

Journal of Yoga & Physical Therapy

Author(s): Grant S, Corbett K, Amjad AM, Wilson J, Aitchison T

Abstract Share this page

Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the results from a Cooper walk run test, a multistage shuttle run test, and a submaximal cycle test with the direct measurement of maximum oxygen uptake on a treadmill. Three predictive tests of maximum oxygen uptake--linear extrapolation of heart rate of VO2 collected from a submaximal cycle ergometer test (predicted L/E), the Cooper 12 min walk, run test, and a multi-stage progressive shuttle run test (MST)--were performed by 22 young healthy males (mean(s.d.) age 22.1 (2.4) years; body mass 72.4(8.9kg)) and the values compared to those obtained by direct measurement on a maximal treadmill test. All of the subjects were regular exercisers. The mean(s.d.) from the various tests in were as follows: treadmill 60.1(8.0), Cooper 60.6(10.3), MST 55.6(8.0), and predictedL/E 52.0(8.4). The Cooper test had a correlation with the treadmill test of 0.92, while the MST and the predictedL/E had correlations of 0.86 and 0.76 respectively. Both the MST and predictedL/E showed systematic underprediction of the treadmill value. On average, the MST was 4.5 (s.e. 0.9) lower than the treadmill VO2max while the predictedL/E was 7.8 min-1 (s.e. 1.4) lower than the treadmill VO2max. These findings indicate that, for the population assessed, the Cooper walk run test is the best predictor of VO2max among the three tests.
This article was published in Br J Sports Med and referenced in Journal of Yoga & Physical Therapy

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version