2011International Journal of Sports MedicineRequires access

Influence of Cycle Ergometer Type and Sex on Assessment of 30-Second Anaerobic Capacity and Power

Anthony S. Leicht, Rebecca Sealey, Wade H. Sinclair

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

This study examined the influence of cycle ergometer type and sex on assessment of 30-s anaerobic capacity and power. 41 healthy adults performed a 30-s anaerobic cycle test using a mechanically- (ME) and air-braked (AE) ergometer in a randomised order, approximately 7 days apart. Peak heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion were similar between tests with peak HR greater for females compared to males (187.0 ± 9.1 vs. 180.8 ± 9.9 bpm, p<0.05). Peak power (1 100 ± 330 vs. 802 ± 225 W), mean power (793 ± 223 vs. 587 ± 156 W) and total work (23.8 ± 6.7 vs. 17.6 ± 4.7 kJ) were greater for AE compared to ME (p<0.001) and greater for males compared to females (p<0.001). The mean difference for anaerobic capacity and power between AE and ME were similar for males and females (37-41% vs. 33-35%, p>0.05). Peak lactate was greater for AE compared to ME (16.1 ± 3.4 vs. 14.8 ± 2.9 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05) and greater for males compared to females (16.2 ± 3.5 vs. 14.6 ± 2.7 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05). The current study demonstrated that anaerobic power and capacity were substantially greater when assessed using AE compared to the traditional ME with the difference between ergometer types unaffected by sex. Ergometer type should be considered when comparing anaerobic results across populations and/or studies.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study examined the influence of cycle ergometer type and sex on assessment of 30-s anaerobic capacity and power. 41 healthy adults performed a 30-s anaerobic cycle test using a mechanically- (ME) and air-braked (AE) ergometer in a randomised order, approximately 7 days apart. Peak heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion were similar between tests with peak HR greater for females compared to males (187.0 ± 9.1 vs. 180.8 ± 9.9 bpm, p<0.05). Peak power (1 100 ± 330 vs. 802 ± 225 W), mean power (793 ± 223 vs. 587 ± 156 W) and total work (23.8 ± 6.7 vs. 17.6 ± 4.7 kJ) were greater for AE compared to ME (p<0.001) and greater for males compared to females (p<0.001). The mean difference for anaerobic capacity and power between AE and ME were similar for males and females (37-41% vs. 33-35%, p>0.05). Peak lactate was greater for AE compared to ME (16.1 ± 3.4 vs. 14.8 ± 2.9 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05) and greater for males compared to females (16.2 ± 3.5 vs. 14.6 ± 2.7 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05). The current study demonstrated that anaerobic power and capacity were substantially greater when assessed using AE compared to the traditional ME with the difference between ergometer types unaffected by sex. Ergometer type should be considered when comparing anaerobic results across populations and/or studies.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 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

This study examined the influence of cycle ergometer type and sex on assessment of 30-s anaerobic capacity and power. 41 healthy adults performed a 30-s anaerobic cycle test using a mechanically- (ME) and air-braked (AE) ergometer in a randomised order, approximately 7 days apart. Peak heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion were similar between tests with peak HR greater for females compared to males (187.0 ± 9.1 vs. 180.8 ± 9.9 bpm, p<0.05). Peak power (1 100 ± 330 vs. 802 ± 225 W), mean power (793 ± 223 vs. 587 ± 156 W) and total work (23.8 ± 6.7 vs. 17.6 ± 4.7 kJ) were greater for AE compared to ME (p<0.001) and greater for males compared to females (p<0.001). The mean difference for anaerobic capacity and power between AE and ME were similar for males and females (37-41% vs. 33-35%, p>0.05). Peak lactate was greater for AE compared to ME (16.1 ± 3.4 vs. 14.8 ± 2.9 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05) and greater for males compared to females (16.2 ± 3.5 vs. 14.6 ± 2.7 mmol·L (-1); p<0.05). The current study demonstrated that anaerobic power and capacity were substantially greater when assessed using AE compared to the traditional ME with the difference between ergometer types unaffected by sex. Ergometer type should be considered when comparing anaerobic results across populations and/or studies.

Key concepts: Cycle ergometer, Anaerobic exercise, Bicycle ergometer, Power (physics), Medicine, Physical therapy, Mathematics, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Influence of Cycle Ergometer Type and Sex on Assessment of 30-Second Anaerobic Capacity and Power — Research Paper | ScholarLens