•  
  •  
 

Article Title

VO2MAX OBSERVATION WINDOW DIFFERENCES IN MALE NCAA CROSS-COUNTRY ATHLETES

Abstract

Lynnsey R. Bowling1, Savanna N. Knight1, Mac J. Carder2, Eric M. Scudamore2, Veronika Pribyslavska2, Eric K. O'Neal1. 1University of North Alabama, Florence, AL. 2Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed differences in VO2max values (L/min, ml/kg/min, and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) between varying observation windows (OW): 60s, 30s, and 15s. METHODS: Collegiate male cross-country athletes (n=15) completed a singular VO2max test with metabolic data collected via metabolic cart (TrueOne 2400, ParvoMedics Inc., Sandy, UT). Absolute and relative VO2max, as well as RER data, were then analyzed in OW of 60s, 30s, and 15s via repeated measures analysis of variance to detect differences between OW. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was also conducted to assess the relationships of the different OW, with 60s serving as the criterion measurement. RESULTS: No significant differences were found during any OWs between absolute VO2max values (p=0.15) or RER values (p=0.08). Relative VO2max values were significantly different (p<0.05) between 15s, 30s, and 60s OWs (70.9 ± 3.7, 69.2 ± 3.9, and 68.6 ± 3.9 mL/kg/min, respectively). The ICC between each OW was strong for absolute VO2max, relative VO2max, and RER (ICC = 0.95, 0.96, and 0.96, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that relative VO2max results of male cross-country athletes differ when utilizing 15s, 30s, and 60s OWs. Larger values were found to be associated with a smaller OW and it appears that an unspecified OW could lead to inconsistencies in reporting of relative VO2max values. Future investigations would benefit from the reporting of the OW, when VO2max testing is a primary variable of concern.

This document is currently not available here.

COinS