Does the preferred walk-run transition speed on steep inclines minimize energetic cost, heart rate or neither?

Do poles really "save the legs" during uphill pole walking at different intensities?

PURPOSE

In sky- and trail-running competitions, many athletes use poles. The aims of this study were to investigate whether the use of poles affects the force exerted on the ground at the feet (Ffoot), cardiorespiratory variables and maximal performance during uphill walking.

METHODS

Fifteen male trail runners completed four testing sessions on different days. On the first two days, they performed two incremental uphill treadmill walking tests to exhaustion with (PWincr) and without poles (Wincr). On the following days, they performed submaximal and maximal tests with (PW80 and PWmax) and without (W80 and Wmax) poles on an outdoor trail course. We measured cardiorespiratory parameters, the rating of perceived exertion, the axial poling force and Ffoot.

RESULTS

When walking on the treadmill, we found that poles reduced maximum Ffoot (- 2.8 ± 6.4%, p = 0.03) and average Ffoot (- 2.4 ± 3.3%, p = 0.0089). However, when outdoors, we found pole effect only for average Ffoot (p = 0.0051), which was lower when walking with poles (- 2.6 ± 3.9%, p = 0.0306 during submaximal trial and - 5.21 ± 5.51%, p = 0.0096 during maximal trial). We found no effects of poles on cardiorespiratory parameters across all tested conditions. Performance was faster in PWmax than in Wmax (+ 2.5 ± 3.4%, p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

The use of poles reduces the foot force both on the treadmill and outdoors at submaximal and maximal intensities. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that the use of poles "saves the legs" during uphill without affecting the metabolic cost.

Estimating Metabolic Energy Expenditure During Level Running in Healthy, Military-Age Women and Men

ABSTRACT

Looney, DP, Hoogkamer, W, Kram, R, Arellano, CJ, and Spiering, BA. Estimating metabolic energy expenditure during level running in healthy, military-age women and men. J Strength Cond Res 37(12): 2496-2503, 2023-Quantifying the rate of metabolic energy expenditure (Ṁ) of varied aerobic exercise modalities is important for optimizing fueling and performance and maintaining safety in military personnel operating in extreme conditions. However, although equations exist for estimating oxygen uptake during running, surprisingly, there are no general equations that estimate Ṁ. Our purpose was to generate a general equation for estimating Ṁ during level running in healthy, military-age (18-44 years) women and men. We compiled indirect calorimetry data collected during treadmill running from 3 types of sources: original individual subject data (n = 45), published individual subject data (30 studies; n = 421), and published group mean data (20 studies, n = 619). Linear and quadratic equations were fit on the aggregated data set using a mixed-effects modeling approach. A chi-squared (χ2) difference test was conducted to determine whether the more complex quadratic equation was justified (p < 0.05). Our primary indicator of model goodness-of-fit was the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD). We also examined whether individual characteristics (age, height, body mass, and maximal oxygen uptake [V̇O2max]) could minimize prediction errors. The compiled data set exhibited considerable variability in Ṁ (14.54 ± 3.52 W·kg-1), respiratory exchange ratios (0.89 ± 0.06), and running speeds (3.50 ± 0.86 m·s-1). The quadratic regression equation had reduced residual sum of squares compared with the linear fit (χ2, 3,484; p < 0.001), with higher combined accuracy and precision (RMSD, 1.31 vs. 1.33 W·kg-1). Age (p = 0.034), height (p = 0.026), and body mass (p = 0.019) were associated with the magnitude of under and overestimation, which was not the case for V̇O2max (p = 0.898). The newly derived running energy expenditure estimation (RE3) model accurately predicts level running Ṁ at speeds from 1.78 to 5.70 m·s-1 in healthy, military-age women and men. Users can rely on the following equations for improved predictions of running Ṁ as a function of running speed (S, m·s-1) in either watts (W·kg-1 = 4.43 + 1.51·S + 0.37·S2) or kilocalories per minute (kcal·kg-1·min-1 = 308.8 + 105.2·S + 25.58·S2).

Pole Walking Is Faster but Not Cheaper During Steep Uphill Walking

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare pole walking (PW) and walking without poles (W) on a steep uphill mountain path (1.3 km, 433 m of elevation gain) at 2 different intensities: a maximal effort that would simulate a vertical kilometer intensity and a lower intensity (80% of maximal) simulating an ultratrail race.

METHODS

On the first day, we tested the participants in the laboratory to determine their maximal physiological parameters, respiratory compensation point, and gas exchange threshold. Then, they completed 4 uphill tests along a mountain path on 4 separate days, 2 at their maximum effort (PWmax and Wmax, randomized order) and 2 at 80% of the mean vertical velocity maintained during the first 2 trials (PW80 and W80, randomized order). We collected metabolic data, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rating of perceived exertion at the end of each trial. We also collected rating of perceived exertion at every 100 m of elevation gain during PW80 and W80.

RESULTS

Participants completed the maximal effort faster with poles versus without poles (18:51 [03:12] vs 19:19 [03:01] in min:s, P = .013, d = 0.08, small). Twelve of the 15 participants (80%) improved their performance when they used poles. During PW80 and W80, none of the physiological or biomechanical parameters were different.

CONCLUSION

In the examined condition, athletes should use poles during steep uphill maximal efforts to obtain the best performance. Conversely, during submaximal effort, the use of poles does not provide advantages in uphill PW.

Energetics and Mechanics of Steep Treadmill Versus Overground Pole Walking: A Pilot Study

PURPOSE

To compare energetics and spatiotemporal parameters of steep uphill pole walking on a treadmill and overground.

METHODS

First, the authors evaluated 6 male trail runners during an incremental graded test on a treadmill. Then, they performed a maximal overground test with poles and an overground test at 80% (OG80) of vertical velocity of maximal overground test with poles on an uphill mountain path (length = 1.3 km, elevation gain = 433 m). Finally, they covered the same elevation gain using poles on a customized treadmill at the average vertical velocity of the OG80. During all the tests, the authors measured oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide production, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rate of perceived exertion.

RESULTS

Treadmills required lower metabolic power (15.3 [1.9] vs 16.6 [2.0] W/kg, P = .002) and vertical cost of transport (49.6 [2.7] vs 53.7 [2.1] J/kg·m, P < .001) compared with OG80. Also, oxygen uptake was lower on a treadmill (41.7 [5.0] vs 46.2 [5.0] mL/kg·min, P = .001). Conversely, respiratory quotient was higher on TR80 compared with OG80 (0.98 [0.02] vs 0.89 [0.04], P = .032). In addition, rate of perceived exertion was higher on a treadmill and increased with elevation (P < .001). The authors did not detect any differences in other physiological measurements or in spatiotemporal parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers, coaches, and athletes should be aware that steep treadmill pole walking requires lower energy consumption but same heart rate and rate of perceived exertion than overground pole walking at the same average intensity.