The effect of handrail support on oxygen uptake during steady-state treadmill exercise.

Jennifer Berling, Carl Foster, Mark Gibson, Scott Doberstein, John Porcari
{"title":"The effect of handrail support on oxygen uptake during steady-state treadmill exercise.","authors":"Jennifer Berling,&nbsp;Carl Foster,&nbsp;Mark Gibson,&nbsp;Scott Doberstein,&nbsp;John Porcari","doi":"10.1097/00008483-200611000-00009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Heart rate (HR) and oxygen consumption (VO(2)) are indicators of the intensity of exercise. Handrail support has been shown, during maximal treadmill testing, to blunt HR and VO(2) responses at a particular speed and grade, resulting in an increased treadmill time and overprediction in aerobic capacity.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study was designed to determine if handrail support would similarly blunt HR and VO(2) responses during steady-state treadmill exercise at intensities typical of exercise training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy volunteers (age, 38-60 years; N = 10) performed maximal treadmill exercise to define VO2max (35.4 +/- 6.5 mL kg(-1) min(-1)) and ventilatory threshold (26.4 +/- 5.8 mL kg(-1) min(-1)). They also performed 3 random steady-state exercise bouts including free arm swing, handrail support-resting, and handrail support-gripping (HRS-G). Each test consisted of three 5-minute stages with intensity levels corresponding to 75%, 85%, and 95% of the speed and grade at ventilatory threshold.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant (P < .05) differences in HR and VO2 at the 75%, 85%, and 95% ventilatory thresholds in HRS-G (108, 114, and 121 beats min and 17.2, 18.0, and 20.6 mL kg min, respectively) versus handrail support-resting (114, 126, and 137 beats min and 19.5, 21.8, and 23.9 mL kg min, respectively) and HRS-G versus free arm swing (120, 130, and 142 beats min and 20.3, 22.8, and 26.1 mL kg min, respectively). Rating of perceived exertion was significantly (P < .05) different between HRS-G (1.8, 2.4, and 3.1) and free arm swing (2.2, 2.9, and 3.6) at all intensities and between HRS-G (2.4 and 3.1, respectively) and handrail support-resting (3 and 3.7, respectively) at the 85% and 95% ventilatory thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gripping and, to a lesser degree, resting the hands on the handrails during steady-state treadmill walking will blunt responses during exercise training and may result in less predictable exercise program.</p>","PeriodicalId":15203,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation","volume":"26 6","pages":"391-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/00008483-200611000-00009","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/00008483-200611000-00009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

Rationale: Heart rate (HR) and oxygen consumption (VO(2)) are indicators of the intensity of exercise. Handrail support has been shown, during maximal treadmill testing, to blunt HR and VO(2) responses at a particular speed and grade, resulting in an increased treadmill time and overprediction in aerobic capacity.

Objectives: This study was designed to determine if handrail support would similarly blunt HR and VO(2) responses during steady-state treadmill exercise at intensities typical of exercise training.

Methods: Healthy volunteers (age, 38-60 years; N = 10) performed maximal treadmill exercise to define VO2max (35.4 +/- 6.5 mL kg(-1) min(-1)) and ventilatory threshold (26.4 +/- 5.8 mL kg(-1) min(-1)). They also performed 3 random steady-state exercise bouts including free arm swing, handrail support-resting, and handrail support-gripping (HRS-G). Each test consisted of three 5-minute stages with intensity levels corresponding to 75%, 85%, and 95% of the speed and grade at ventilatory threshold.

Results: There were significant (P < .05) differences in HR and VO2 at the 75%, 85%, and 95% ventilatory thresholds in HRS-G (108, 114, and 121 beats min and 17.2, 18.0, and 20.6 mL kg min, respectively) versus handrail support-resting (114, 126, and 137 beats min and 19.5, 21.8, and 23.9 mL kg min, respectively) and HRS-G versus free arm swing (120, 130, and 142 beats min and 20.3, 22.8, and 26.1 mL kg min, respectively). Rating of perceived exertion was significantly (P < .05) different between HRS-G (1.8, 2.4, and 3.1) and free arm swing (2.2, 2.9, and 3.6) at all intensities and between HRS-G (2.4 and 3.1, respectively) and handrail support-resting (3 and 3.7, respectively) at the 85% and 95% ventilatory thresholds.

Conclusion: Gripping and, to a lesser degree, resting the hands on the handrails during steady-state treadmill walking will blunt responses during exercise training and may result in less predictable exercise program.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
扶手支撑对稳态跑步机运动中摄氧量的影响。
原理:心率(HR)和耗氧量(VO(2))是运动强度的指标。在最大跑步机测试中,扶手支撑已被证明会在特定速度和坡度下减弱HR和VO(2)反应,导致跑步机时间增加和有氧能力的过度预测。目的:本研究旨在确定在典型运动训练强度的稳态跑步机运动中,扶手支撑是否会类似地减弱HR和VO(2)反应。方法:健康志愿者(年龄38 ~ 60岁;N = 10)进行最大跑步机运动以确定最大摄氧量(35.4 +/- 6.5 mL kg(-1) min(-1))和通气阈值(26.4 +/- 5.8 mL kg(-1) min(-1))。他们还进行了3次随机稳态运动,包括自由手臂摆动、扶手支撑休息和扶手支撑握紧(rs -g)。每个测试包括三个5分钟的阶段,强度水平对应于呼吸阈值时速度和等级的75%、85%和95%。结果:在75%、85%和95%通气阈值时,HRS-G组的HR和VO2(分别为108、114、121次、17.2、18.0、20.6 mL kg min)与扶手支撑休息组(分别为114、126、137次、19.5、21.8、23.9 mL kg min)和HRS-G组与自由摆臂组(分别为120、130、142次、20.3、22.8、26.1 mL kg min)相比有显著差异(P < 0.05)。在所有强度下,rs - g组(1.8、2.4和3.1)和自由摆臂组(2.2、2.9和3.6)以及在85%和95%通气阈值下,rs - g组(分别为2.4和3.1)和扶手支撑休息组(分别为3和3.7)的感知用力评分有显著差异(P < 0.05)。结论:在稳定状态的跑步机上行走时,握紧或在较小程度上将手放在扶手上,会使运动训练中的反应迟钝,并可能导致不可预测的运动计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A systematic approach to improve lipids in coronary artery disease patients participating in a cardiac rehabilitation program. The American Heart Association CPR Anytime Program: the potential impact of highly accessible training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Closing the cholesterol treatment gap: cardiac rehabilitation can make a difference. Five-year changes in North Carolina outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Correlates of physical activity change in patients not attending cardiac rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1