Comparison of parameters derived from a three-minute all-out test with classical benchmarks for running exercise

Abstract

This study aimed to compare four constructs from the three-minute all-out test (AO3)-end power (EP), the area above EP (WEP), maximum power (Pmax), and attained [Formula: see text]-to those derived from the classical CP model in tethered running. Seventeen male recreational runners underwent two experiments to test for reliability and agreement of AO3 parameters with those obtained from the classical CP model (Wꞌ and CP), a graded exercise test ([Formula: see text]) and a 30-second all-out test (AO30s; Pmax); all performed on a non-motorized treadmill (NMT). Significance levels were set at p<0.05. There were no significant differences between test-retest for Pmax (p = 0.51), WEP (p = 0.39), and EP (p = 0.64), showing generally close to zero bias. Further, retest ICC were high for Pmax and EP (ICC > 0.86) but moderate for WEP (ICC = 0.69). Pmax showed no difference between AO3 and AO30s (p = 0.18; CV% = 9.5%). EP and WEP disagreed largely with their classical critical power model counterparts (p = 0.05; CV%>32.7% and p = 0.23; CV%>39.7%, respectively), showing greater error than their test-retest reliability. [Formula: see text] from AO3 was not different (p = 0.13) and well related (CV% = 8.4; ICC = 0.87) to the incremental test [Formula: see text]. Under the studied conditions, the agreement of EP and WEP to CP and Wꞌ was not strong enough to assure their use interchangeably. Pmax and [Formula: see text] were closer to their criterion parameters.

Fig 1. The study design.

Study’s phase 1 tested the reliability of AO3 parameters and Pmax comparison to AO30s. Study’s phase 2 had a graded exercise test, three CWR intensities in a randomized order, finishing with one AO3. CWR was used for the classical CP model. All sessions were performed with 24–72 h intervals between them.

Fig 2

Data example for an AO3 (A) and an incremental intensity test (B). Resultant power is depicted in black, with stage mean work-rate as the straight grey lines. $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2$ is represented by open grey circles and plotted on the right axis.

Fig 3. Test-retest comparison of AO3 parameters in mean and SD (Pmax–A; WEP–C; EP–E) and by Bland Altman analysis (Pmax–D; WEP–E; EP–F); (n = 9).

Pmax—maximum power; EP–end power; WEP–area above end power.

Fig 4

Comparison between Pmax from AO30s and AO3 (A), with the respective Bland-Altman analysis (B); (n = 9). PmaxAO30s –maximum power during the 30-s all-out; PmaxAO3 –maximum power during the AO3.

Fig 5

Comparison among WEP and EP derived from AO3 to Wꞌ and CP from the classical critical power models (A and D), and their respective paired Bland-Altman analysis: W1’ vs. WEP (B), Wꞌ2 vs. WEP (C); CP1 vs. EP (E), CP2 vs. EP (F). EP–end power; WEP–area above end power; CP1 –Critical power from model 1; CP2 –Critical power from model 2; Wꞌ1—curvature constant from model 1; Wꞌ2—curvature constant from model 2.

Fig 6

Comparison of $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_{2\max }$ obtained in the graded exercise test (INC), the verification bout (VB) and the AO3 (A), and Bland Altman between INC and AO3 (B).