A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Submaximal Testing to Estimate Aerobic Capacity Using a Matrix C5x Stepmill. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to evaluate if the Matrix C5x stepmill's submaximal test can reliably predict maximal oxygen uptake in participants.
  • Sixteen individuals underwent both a maximal treadmill test and a submaximal test on the stepmill, measuring oxygen uptake with a Cosmed K5.
  • Results showed that measured maximal oxygen uptake (39.18) was significantly higher than estimates from the stepmill (28.06) and calculations from submaximal data (35.58), indicating that the stepmill's estimations for METs and oxygen uptake were not accurate.

Article Abstract

The primary purpose of this study was to determine if the Matrix C5x stepmill's preprogrammed submaximal test is able to accurately predict maximal oxygen uptake. Sixteen participants completed a maximal treadmill test and a preprogrammed submaximal test on a Matrix C5x stepmill. Oxygen uptake was measured using a Cosmed K5 during both tests. Maximal oxygen uptake (VO) was calculated from submaximal data using a multi-stage calculation and compared against measured VO from the maximal test and estimated VO from the submaximal stepmill test. METs were also measured during the submaximal test and compared to the METs estimated by the stepmill and METs calculated using submaximal stepping equations. Measured VO (39.18 α 6.6 mlkgmin) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than estimated VO (28.06 α 3.2 mlkgmin) and calculated VO (35.58 α 8.0 mlkgmin). Measured METs were significantly (p = 0.04) higher than estimated METs in all stages, and higher than calculated METs in stage 1 of the submaximal test. The C5x did not provide accurate estimations of METs or maximal oxygen uptake. Calculating maximal oxygen uptake from submaximal stepmill data may provide an alternative, although development of a new equation may be warranted.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9465752PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2022-0055DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

oxygen uptake
20
submaximal test
16
maximal oxygen
16
matrix c5x
12
submaximal
9
c5x stepmill
8
preprogrammed submaximal
8
calculated submaximal
8
submaximal stepmill
8
test
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!