You could be reading the full-text of this article now if you...

If you have access to this article through your institution,
you can view this article in

Verification Criteria for the Determination of V[Combining Dot Above]O2max in the Field

Sánchez-Otero, Tania1; Iglesias-Soler, Eliseo1; Boullosa, Daniel A.2; Tuimil, José L.1

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research:
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000576
Original Research
Abstract

Abstract: Sánchez-Otero, T, Iglesias-Soler, E, Boullosa, DA, and Tuimil, JL. Verification criteria for the determination of

in the field. J Strength Cond Res 28(12): 3544–3551, 2014—The purpose of this study was to evaluate if a verification test (VT) performed in the field offers more confident results than do traditional criteria in the determination of maximal oxygen uptake (

). Twelve amateur runners (age, 36.6 ± 6.6 years) performed a maximal graded field test and after 15 minutes of passive recovery a supramaximal test to exhaustion at 105% of their velocity associated with

(v

). Traditional criteria and 2 different verification criteria were evaluated. Verification criteria were (a) maximal oxygen uptake achieved in the VT (

) must be ≤5% higher than

, and (b) no significant differences of means between tests. All participants met the first verification criterion although significant differences were found between

and

(59.4 ± 5.1 vs. 56.2 ± 4.7 ml·kg−1·min−1, p < 0.01). The criteria for the plateau, peak heart rate (HRpeak), maximum respiratory exchange ratio (RERmax), and maximum blood lactate concentration ([La]max) were satisfied by 75, 66, 92, and 66 of the participants, respectively. Kappa coefficients gave a significant and substantial agreement beyond chance between traditional criteria (p < 0.001). Despite the substantial agreement, traditional criteria induced the rejection of participants that might have achieved a true

with HRpeak and [La]max being the more stringent criteria for amateur runners. A verification protocol in the field using the criterion based on individual analysis is recommended.

Author Information

1Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sports Sciences and Physical Education, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain; and

2Postgraduate Program in Physical Education, Catholic University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil

Address correspondence to Tania Sánchez-Otero, t.sanchez@udc.es.

Copyright © 2014 by the National Strength & Conditioning Association.