Determining the Optimal Workrate for Cycle Ergometer Verification Phase Testing in Males with Obesity

Confirming the attainment of maximal oxygen uptake within special and clinical groups: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiopulmonary exercise test and verification phase protocols

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A plateau in oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) during an incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) to volitional exhaustion appears less likely to occur in special and clinical populations. Secondary maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) criteria have been shown to commonly underestimate the actual [Formula: see text]. The verification phase protocol might determine the occurrence of 'true' [Formula: see text] in these populations. The primary aim of the current study was to systematically review and provide a meta-analysis on the suitability of the verification phase for confirming 'true' [Formula: see text] in special and clinical groups. Secondary aims were to explore the applicability of the verification phase according to specific participant characteristics and investigate which test protocols and procedures minimise the differences between the highest [Formula: see text] values attained in the CPET and verification phase.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and EMBASE) were searched using specific search strategies and relevant data were extracted from primary studies. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed. Meta-analysis techniques were applied to quantify weighted mean differences (standard deviations) in peak [Formula: see text] from a CPET and a verification phase within study groups using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses investigated the differences in [Formula: see text] according to individual characteristics and test protocols. The methodological quality of the included primary studies was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist to obtain a level of evidence. Participant-level [Formula: see text] data were analysed according to the threshold criteria reported by the studies or the inherent measurement error of the metabolic analysers and displayed as Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included in the systematic review, whilst 30 presented quantitative information for meta-analysis. Within the 30 studies, the highest mean [Formula: see text] values attained in the CPET and verification phase protocols were similar (mean difference = -0.00 [95% confidence intervals, CI = -0.03 to 0.03] L·min-1, p = 0.87; level of evidence, LoE: strong). The specific clinical groups with sufficient primary studies to be meta-analysed showed a similar [Formula: see text] between the CPET and verification phase (p > 0.05, LoE: limited to strong). Across all 30 studies, [Formula: see text] was not affected by differences in test protocols (p > 0.05; LoE: moderate to strong). Only 23 (53.5%) of the 43 reviewed studies reported how many participants achieved a lower, equal, or higher [Formula: see text] value in the verification phase versus the CPET or reported or supplied participant-level [Formula: see text] data for this information to be obtained. The percentage of participants that achieved a lower, equal, or higher [Formula: see text] value in the verification phase was highly variable across studies (e.g. the percentage that achieved a higher [Formula: see text] in the verification phase ranged from 0% to 88.9%).

CONCLUSION

Group-level verification phase data appear useful for confirming a specific CPET protocol likely elicited [Formula: see text], or a reproducible [Formula: see text], for a given special or clinical group. Participant-level data might be useful for confirming whether specific participants have likely elicited [Formula: see text], or a reproducible [Formula: see text], however, more research reporting participant-level data is required before evidence-based guidelines can be given.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021247658) https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.

Sex differences in hemodynamic response to high-intensity interval exercise

Sex differences in the cardiorespiratory and hemodynamic response to exercise exist due to differences in heart size, blood volume, and hemoglobin mass, eliciting higher maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max ) in men versus women. Data are equivocal whether sex differences in training responsiveness occur. This study investigated potential sex differences in the hemodynamic response (stroke volume (SV) and cardiac output (CO)) to high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE). Habitually active men (n = 15) and women (n = 13) underwent VO2max testing, followed by three HIIE sessions consisting of the 4 × 4, 10 × 1, and reduced exertion high-intensity training (REHIT), whose order was randomized. During exercise, oxygen uptake (VO2 ) and hemodynamic responses were determined. Results showed no sex difference in peak relative VO2 (p = 0.263), CO (p = 0.277), or SV (p = 0.116), although absolute values were higher in men (p < 0.05). Peak absolute (127.3 ± 20.6 vs. 115.2 ± 16.6 mL/beat, p = 0.004, d = 0.66) and relative SV (111.0 ± 15.5 vs. 100.7 ± 11.1% max, p = 0.005, d = 0.78) were higher with REHIT versus 4 × 4. No sex differences in mean relative VO2 , CO, or SV occurred (p > 0.05). Data showed lower mean VO2 during REHIT versus 4 × 4 (59.3 ± 6.8 vs. 65.8 ± 5.8 %VO2max , p < 0.001, d = 1.05) and 10 × 1 (59.3 ± 6.8 vs. 69.1 ± 7.4 %VO2max , p < 0.001, d = 1.4). Mean CO was lower in REHIT than 10 × 1 (79.8 ± 8.6 vs. 84.0 ± 7.4% max, p = 0.012, d = 0.53). Previously reported differences in VO2max response to HIIE may not be due to unique hemodynamic responses.

Utility of Verification Testing to Confirm Attainment of Maximal Oxygen Uptake in Unhealthy Participants: A Perspective Review

Maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂max) is strongly associated with endurance performance as well as health risk. Despite the fact that VO₂max has been measured in exercise physiology for over a century, robust procedures to ensure that VO₂max is attained at the end of graded exercise testing (GXT) do not exist. This shortcoming led to development of an additional bout referred to as a verification test (VER) completed after incremental exercise or on the following day. Workloads used during VER can be either submaximal or supramaximal depending on the population tested. Identifying a true VO₂max value in unhealthy individuals at risk for or having chronic disease seems to be more paramount than in healthy and active persons, who face much lower risk of premature morbidity and mortality. This review summarized existing findings from 19 studies including 783 individuals regarding efficacy of VER in unhealthy individuals to determine its efficacy and feasibility in eliciting a 'true' VO₂max in this sample. Results demonstrated that VER is a safe and suitable approach to confirm attainment of VO₂max in unhealthy adults and children, as in most studies VER-derived VO₂max is similar of that obtained in GXT. However, many individuals reveal higher VO₂max in response to VER and protocols used across studies vary, which merits additional work identifying if an optimal VER protocol exists to elicit 'true' VO₂max in this particular population.