Kevin Caen, David C Poole, Anni Vanhatalo, Andrew M Jones
{"title":"Critical Power and Maximal Lactate Steady State in Cycling: \"Watts\" the Difference?","authors":"Kevin Caen, David C Poole, Anni Vanhatalo, Andrew M Jones","doi":"10.1007/s40279-024-02075-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>From a physiological perspective, the delineation between steady-state and non-steady-state exercise, also referred to as the maximal metabolic steady state, holds paramount importance for evaluating athletic performance and designing and monitoring training programs. The critical power and the maximal lactate steady state are two widely used indices to estimate this threshold, yet previous studies consistently reported significant discrepancies between their associated power outputs. These findings have fueled the debate regarding the interchangeability of critical power and the maximal lactate steady state in practice. This paper reviews the methodological intricacies intrinsic to the determination of these thresholds, and elucidates how inappropriate determination methods and methodological inconsistencies between studies have contributed to the documented differences in the literature. Through a critical examination of relevant literature and by integration of our laboratory data, we demonstrate that differences between critical power and the maximal lactate steady state may be reconciled to only a few Watts when applying appropriate and strict determination criteria, so that both indices may be used to estimate the maximal metabolic steady-state threshold in practice. To this end, we have defined a set of good practice guidelines to assist scientists and coaches in obtaining the most valid critical power and maximal lactate steady state estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":21969,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2497-2513"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02075-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
From a physiological perspective, the delineation between steady-state and non-steady-state exercise, also referred to as the maximal metabolic steady state, holds paramount importance for evaluating athletic performance and designing and monitoring training programs. The critical power and the maximal lactate steady state are two widely used indices to estimate this threshold, yet previous studies consistently reported significant discrepancies between their associated power outputs. These findings have fueled the debate regarding the interchangeability of critical power and the maximal lactate steady state in practice. This paper reviews the methodological intricacies intrinsic to the determination of these thresholds, and elucidates how inappropriate determination methods and methodological inconsistencies between studies have contributed to the documented differences in the literature. Through a critical examination of relevant literature and by integration of our laboratory data, we demonstrate that differences between critical power and the maximal lactate steady state may be reconciled to only a few Watts when applying appropriate and strict determination criteria, so that both indices may be used to estimate the maximal metabolic steady-state threshold in practice. To this end, we have defined a set of good practice guidelines to assist scientists and coaches in obtaining the most valid critical power and maximal lactate steady state estimates.
期刊介绍:
Sports Medicine focuses on providing definitive and comprehensive review articles that interpret and evaluate current literature, aiming to offer insights into research findings in the sports medicine and exercise field. The journal covers major topics such as sports medicine and sports science, medical syndromes associated with sport and exercise, clinical medicine's role in injury prevention and treatment, exercise for rehabilitation and health, and the application of physiological and biomechanical principles to specific sports.
Types of Articles:
Review Articles: Definitive and comprehensive reviews that interpret and evaluate current literature to provide rationale for and application of research findings.
Leading/Current Opinion Articles: Overviews of contentious or emerging issues in the field.
Original Research Articles: High-quality research articles.
Enhanced Features: Additional features like slide sets, videos, and animations aimed at increasing the visibility, readership, and educational value of the journal's content.
Plain Language Summaries: Summaries accompanying articles to assist readers in understanding important medical advances.
Peer Review Process:
All manuscripts undergo peer review by international experts to ensure quality and rigor. The journal also welcomes Letters to the Editor, which will be considered for publication.