2008Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseRequires access

Validity Of The Running Anaerobic Sprint Test (Rast) For Assess Anaerobic Power And Predicting Performances

Alessandro Moura Zagatto, Wladimir Rafael Beck, Cláudio Alexandre Gobatto

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

The anaerobic component is a very important physiologic parameter in sport performance. The cycle ergometer Wingate Test (WAnT) is commonly used to measure anaerobic capacity and power in sports. But, performing WAnT with running, soccer, basketball, and other sports athletes may not be ideal. The Running Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) is a recently adapted WAnT test for running requires investigation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of RAST in anaerobic assessment and predicting short-distance performance. METHODS: Forty armed forces personnel were recruited (age 19.78±1.18 years; body mass 70.34±8.10 kg; height 1.76±0.53 m; body fat 15.30±5.65 %; and body mass index 22.67±2.08 kg.m−2) for this two stage study. The first stage investigated RAST reproducibility (6 × 35m maximal running with 10s recovery) using a test and a retest methodology; the second stage evaluated RAST validity by comparing scores between Wingate tests (30s maximal cycle ergometer test) and 35, 50, 100, 200, and 400m short-distances performances scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between test and retest scores (peak power 751.04±123.63W and 730.33±89.90W; mean power 590.62±90.79W and 591.08 ± 86.10W; relative peak power 10.38±1.74W˙Kg−1 and 10.19 ± 1.30W˙Kg−1; relative mean power 8.20±1.34W˙Kg−1 and 8.19±1.12W˙Kg−1, and fatigue index 40.62±9.11% and 38.42 ± 6.56%, respectively) in the first stage, wit5h significant intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC[3,1]) in all RAST scores (0.92; 0.97; 0.94; 0.97; 0.70, respectively). In the second stage, only RAST scores for peak power (r=0.46), mean power (r=0.56) and fatigue index (r=0.63) significantly correlated with WAnT. The short-distance running performances scores corresponded at 5.09±0.29s to 35m, 7.32±0.47s to 50m, 13.90±0.56s to 100m, 28.96±1.83s to 200m, and 66.85±4.49s to 400m, and significantly correlated with RAST, but not with WAnT scores. CONCLUSION: We concluded that this procedure is valid and reproducible, and can be used to measure running anaerobic power and predict short-distance performance. Supported by FUNDECT-Procs. 41/100.111/2006 and 41/100.187/2006

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The anaerobic component is a very important physiologic parameter in sport performance. The cycle ergometer Wingate Test (WAnT) is commonly used to measure anaerobic capacity and power in sports. But, performing WAnT with running, soccer, basketball, and other sports athletes may not be ideal. The Running Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) is a recently adapted WAnT test for running requires investigation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of RAST in anaerobic assessment and predicting short-distance performance. METHODS: Forty armed forces personnel were recruited (age 19.78±1.18 years; body mass 70.34±8.10 kg; height 1.76±0.53 m; body fat 15.30±5.65 %; and body mass index 22.67±2.08 kg.m−2) for this two stage study. The first stage investigated RAST reproducibility (6 × 35m maximal running with 10s recovery) using a test and a retest methodology; the second stage evaluated RAST validity by comparing scores between Wingate tests (30s maximal cycle ergometer test) and 35, 50, 100, 200, and 400m short-distances performances scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between test and retest scores (peak power 751.04±123.63W and 730.33±89.90W; mean power 590.62±90.79W and 591.08 ± 86.10W; relative peak power 10.38±1.74W˙Kg−1 and 10.19 ± 1.30W˙Kg−1; relative mean power 8.20±1.34W˙Kg−1 and 8.19±1.12W˙Kg−1, and fatigue index 40.62±9.11% and 38.42 ± 6.56%, respectively) in the first stage, wit5h significant intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC[3,1]) in all RAST scores (0.92; 0.97; 0.94; 0.97; 0.70, respectively). In the second stage, only RAST scores for peak power (r=0.46), mean power (r=0.56) and fatigue index (r=0.63) significantly correlated with WAnT. The short-distance running performances scores corresponded at 5.09±0.29s to 35m, 7.32±0.47s to 50m, 13.90±0.56s to 100m, 28.96±1.83s to 200m, and 66.85±4.49s to 400m, and significantly correlated with RAST, but not with WAnT scores. CONCLUSION: We concluded that this procedure is valid and reproducible, and can be used to measure running anaerobic power and predict short-distance performance. Supported by FUNDECT-Procs. 41/100.111/2006 and 41/100.187/2006

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The anaerobic component is a very important physiologic parameter in sport performance. The cycle ergometer Wingate Test (WAnT) is commonly used to measure anaerobic capacity and power in sports. But, performing WAnT with running, soccer, basketball, and other sports athletes may not be ideal. The Running Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) is a recently adapted WAnT test for running requires investigation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of RAST in anaerobic assessment and predicting short-distance performance. METHODS: Forty armed forces personnel were recruited (age 19.78±1.18 years; body mass 70.34±8.10 kg; height 1.76±0.53 m; body fat 15.30±5.65 %; and body mass index 22.67±2.08 kg.m−2) for this two stage study. The first stage investigated RAST reproducibility (6 × 35m maximal running with 10s recovery) using a test and a retest methodology; the second stage evaluated RAST validity by comparing scores between Wingate tests (30s maximal cycle ergometer test) and 35, 50, 100, 200, and 400m short-distances performances scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between test and retest scores (peak power 751.04±123.63W and 730.33±89.90W; mean power 590.62±90.79W and 591.08 ± 86.10W; relative peak power 10.38±1.74W˙Kg−1 and 10.19 ± 1.30W˙Kg−1; relative mean power 8.20±1.34W˙Kg−1 and 8.19±1.12W˙Kg−1, and fatigue index 40.62±9.11% and 38.42 ± 6.56%, respectively) in the first stage, wit5h significant intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC[3,1]) in all RAST scores (0.92; 0.97; 0.94; 0.97; 0.70, respectively). In the second stage, only RAST scores for peak power (r=0.46), mean power (r=0.56) and fatigue index (r=0.63) significantly correlated with WAnT. The short-distance running performances scores corresponded at 5.09±0.29s to 35m, 7.32±0.47s to 50m, 13.90±0.56s to 100m, 28.96±1.83s to 200m, and 66.85±4.49s to 400m, and significantly correlated with RAST, but not with WAnT scores. CONCLUSION: We concluded that this procedure is valid and reproducible, and can be used to measure running anaerobic power and predict short-distance performance. Supported by FUNDECT-Procs. 41/100.111/2006 and 41/100.187/2006

Key concepts: Anaerobic exercise, Wingate test, Sprint, Cycle ergometer, Mathematics, Physical therapy, Medicine, Athletes

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source