Because of its practicality, many exercise physiologists use the cycle ergometer to test cardiovascular endurance; yet due to physical injury or handicap, there is a great segment of our population that cannot easily manage an upright seated position. The recumbent position helps to stabilize the upper body, and therefore may help those whose repertoire of postural control is compromised. At present, the majority of studies dealing with upright and recumbent positions for graded exercise testing show the upright position to yield higher HR and VO2 readings. In order to determine the difference between the upright and recumbent cycle ergometer using the Y-Way Protocol, 41 healthy subjects (24 females, 17 males) performed GXT's in each position until HR reached 90% age-predicted max. Subjects were broken into two groups, with one group performing the recumbent test first and the other group performing the upright portion of testing first. Predicted . . and actual VO2 measurements were recorded for each subject, and maximum VO2 predicted. A 2x2x2 ANOVA was applied to the data to determine interaction and effects among position (upright vs. recumbent), protocol (YMCA and actual VO2), and gender. No differences in VO2 max between the upright and recumbent position were observed in either gender or protocol. It was determined that the recumbent position is a valid testing position in the estimation of VO2 max using workload adjustments determined by the Y -Way protocol.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:pacific.edu/oai:scholarlycommons.pacific.edu:uop_etds-3274 |
| Date | 01 January 1994 |
| Creators | Talbot, Shaun Marie |
| Publisher | Scholarly Commons |
| Source Sets | University of the Pacific |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | University of the Pacific Theses and Dissertations |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds