Reliability of MAOD measured at 110% and 120% of peak oxygen uptake for cycling

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001 Jun;33(6):1056-9. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200106000-00028.

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the test-retest reliability of maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) measured at 110% and 120% of peak oxygen uptake (VO2) for cycling in seven untrained male and seven untrained female subjects.

Methods: After one familiarization trial, all subjects performed two MAOD tests at a power output corresponding to 110% and two tests at 120% of VO2peak in random order. MAOD was calculated for each subject as the difference between O2 demand during exercise and the measured VO2.

Results: The mean (+/-SEM) time to exhaustion for the group was not significantly different between trial 1 (226 +/- 13 s) and trial 2 (223 +/- 14 s) of the 110% test. Likewise, the difference in the time to exhaustion between trial 1 (158 +/- 11 s) and trial 2 (159 +/- 10 s) was not significant for the 120% test. The intraclass correlation coefficients for the time to exhaustion were 0.95 for the 110% test and 0.98 for the 120% test. The mean MAOD value obtained in trial 1 (2.62 +/- 0.17 L) was not significantly different from the mean value obtained in trial 2 (2.54 +/- 0.19 L) for the 110% test. Additionally, the mean values for the two trials did not differ significantly for MAOD (2.64 +/- 0.21 L for trial 1 and 2.63 +/- 0.19 L for trial 2) in the 120% test. The intraclass correlation coefficients for MAOD were 0.95 for the 110% test and 0.97 for the 120% test. All intraclass correlation coefficients were significant at P < 0.001.

Conclusions: When conducted under standardized conditions, the determination of MAOD for cycling was highly repeatable at both 110% and 120% of VO2peak in untrained male and female subjects.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Bicycling / physiology*
  • Energy Metabolism / physiology*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Oxygen Consumption / physiology*
  • Physical Endurance*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Sex Factors