4.2 Article

Relationship between Oxygen Uptake, Heart Rate, and Perceived Effort in an Aquatic Incremental Test in Older Women

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17228324

Keywords

water-based exercises; water aerobics; cardiorespiratory; rate of perceived exertion; aging; maximum test

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior-Brazil (CAPES) [001]
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico-Brazil (CNPq) [307496/2017-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Different parameters can be used to control the intensity of aerobic exercises, a choice that should consider the population and exercise environment targeted. Therefore, our study aimed to verify the relationship between oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and cadence during an aquatic incremental test in older women. Nine older women (64.3 +/- 4.4 years) engaged in a water-based aerobic training performed an aquatic incremental test using the stationary running exercise (cadence increases of 15 b center dot min(-1) every 2 min) until participants' volitional exhaustion. VO2, HR, and RPE data were measured, and the percentage of peak VO2 (%VO2peak) and percentage of maximal HR (%HRmax) were calculated. Linear and polynomial regression analyses were performed (alpha = 0.05). Polynomial regressions revealed the best adjustments for all analyses. Data showed a significant relationship (p < 0.001) between %VO2peak and %HRmax (r = 0.921), %VO2peak and RPE (r = 0.870), and %HRmax and RPE (r = 0.878). Likewise, significant relationships between cadence (p < 0.001) and %VO2peak (r = 0.873), %HRmax (r = 0.874), and RPE (r = 0.910) were also observed. In summary, the physiological, subjective, and mechanical variables investigated were highly associated during an aquatic incremental test to exhaustion in older women. Therefore, these different parameters can be employed to adequately prescribe water-based programs according to preference and availability.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available