The system will be going down for regular maintenance. Please save your work and logout.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLamb, Kevin L.*
dc.contributor.authorEston, Roger*
dc.contributor.authorCorns, David*
dc.date.accessioned2008-05-30T17:56:30Z
dc.date.available2008-05-30T17:56:30Z
dc.date.issued1999-10
dc.identifier.citationBritish journal of sports medicine, 1999, 33 (5), pp. 336-339
dc.identifier.issn0306-3674en
dc.identifier.pmid10522637
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/29192
dc.descriptionThis is the author's PDF of an article published in British journal of sports medicine© 1999. The definitive version is available at http://bjsm.bmj.com
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To assess the test-retest reliability (repeatability) of Borg's 6-20 rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale using a more appropriate statistical technique than has been employed in previous investigations. The RPE scale is used widely in exercise science and sports medicine to monitor and/or prescribe levels of exercise intensity. The "95% limits of agreement" technique has recently been advocated as a better means of assessing within-subject (trial to trial) agreement than traditional indicators such as Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients. METHODS: Sixteen male athletes (mean (SD) age 23.6 (5.1) years) completed two identical multistage (incremental) treadmill running protocols over a period of two to five days. RPEs were requested and recorded during the final 15 seconds of each three minute stage. All subjects successfully completed at least four stages in each trial, allowing the reliability of RPE responses to be examined at each stage. RESULTS: The 95% limits of agreement (bias +/- 1.96 x SDdiff) were found to widen as exercise intensity increased: 0.88 (2.02) RPE units (stage 1), 0.25 (2.53) RPE units (stage 2), -0.13 (2.86) RPE units (stage 3), and -0.13 (2.94) RPE units (stage 4). Pearson correlations (0.81, 0.72, 0.65, and 0.60) and intraclass correlations (0.82, 0.80, 0.77, and 0.75) decreased as exercise intensity increased. CONCLUSIONS: These findings question the test-retest reliability of the RPE scale when used to monitor subjective estimates of exercise intensity in progressive (or graded) exercise tests.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.urlhttp://bjsm.bmj.com/en
dc.subjectRPEen
dc.subjectlimits of agreementen
dc.subjectgraded exercise testingen
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten
dc.subject.meshAdulten
dc.subject.meshAnalysis of Varianceen
dc.subject.meshExercise Testen
dc.subject.meshExertionen
dc.subject.meshGreat Britainen
dc.subject.meshHumansen
dc.subject.meshMaleen
dc.subject.meshReference Valuesen
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Resultsen
dc.subject.meshSensitivity and Specificityen
dc.subject.meshSportsen
dc.titleReliability of ratings of perceived exertion during progressive treadmill exercise.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity College Chester
html.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To assess the test-retest reliability (repeatability) of Borg's 6-20 rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale using a more appropriate statistical technique than has been employed in previous investigations. The RPE scale is used widely in exercise science and sports medicine to monitor and/or prescribe levels of exercise intensity. The "95% limits of agreement" technique has recently been advocated as a better means of assessing within-subject (trial to trial) agreement than traditional indicators such as Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients. METHODS: Sixteen male athletes (mean (SD) age 23.6 (5.1) years) completed two identical multistage (incremental) treadmill running protocols over a period of two to five days. RPEs were requested and recorded during the final 15 seconds of each three minute stage. All subjects successfully completed at least four stages in each trial, allowing the reliability of RPE responses to be examined at each stage. RESULTS: The 95% limits of agreement (bias +/- 1.96 x SDdiff) were found to widen as exercise intensity increased: 0.88 (2.02) RPE units (stage 1), 0.25 (2.53) RPE units (stage 2), -0.13 (2.86) RPE units (stage 3), and -0.13 (2.94) RPE units (stage 4). Pearson correlations (0.81, 0.72, 0.65, and 0.60) and intraclass correlations (0.82, 0.80, 0.77, and 0.75) decreased as exercise intensity increased. CONCLUSIONS: These findings question the test-retest reliability of the RPE scale when used to monitor subjective estimates of exercise intensity in progressive (or graded) exercise tests.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
ChesterRep BJSM - RPE 1999.pdf
Size:
109.5Kb
Format:
PDF
Request:
main article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record