Vigorous intensity heart rate-clamp exercise does not elicit recommended oxygen consumption rates

Clara J. Mitchinson; Djadmann Gustave; Pasquale J. Succi; Brian Benitez; Minyoung Kwak; Haley C. Bergstrom

doi:10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2

Vigorous intensity heart rate-clamp exercise does not elicit recommended oxygen consumption rates

Clara J. Mitchinson, Djadmann Gustave, Pasquale J. Succi, Brian Benitez, Minyoung Kwak, Haley C. Bergstrom

Kinesiology and Health Promotion

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: This study examined the power output adjustments and subsequent shifts in metabolic (V̇O₂) demands as well as minute ventilation (V˙_E), respiratory rate (RR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses during vigorous intensity (77–95% HR_peak) heart rate (HR)-clamp cycle ergometry. Methods: Fifteen males (mean ± SD age = 25.9 ± 4.4 years) performed a graded exercise test to exhaustion to determine peak parameters and three, randomly ordered, HR-clamp trials to exhaustion, up to 60 min, at the lower (HR_L = 77% HR_peak), middle (HR_M = 86% HR_peak), and higher (HR_H = 95% HR_peak) end of the vigorous intensity range. Time course of changes were examined. Results: The times to exhaustion (T_lim) for the HR_L, HR_M, and HR_H trials were 56.05 ± 10.09, 44.22 ± 19.00, and 9.74 ± 7.54 min, respectively. There were significant decreases in power output, V˙O₂, and V˙_E across time for each trial, but no changes in RR, and increases in RPE (p < 0.05). Responses were intensity specific for all variables such that mean values were lower for HR_L than HR_M, and HR_L and HR_M were lower than HR_H. The mean V˙O₂ (HR_L = 56.7 ± 3.8, HR_M = 68.1 ± 4.3, and HR_H = 90.5 ± 3.3%V˙O_2max) responses fell below the recommended V˙O₂ range for vigorous exercise at 10%T_lim for HR_L, and at 90%T_lim for HR_M, but remained above the recommended V̇O₂ range for vigorous exercise until 70% of T_lim for HR_H. Conclusions: Only the HR_M trial met the current guidelines of a vigorous intensity V˙O₂ sustained for at least 20 min. This study indicated that HR-clamp exercise cannot be consistently used to prescribe a desired metabolic stimulus for exercise performed in a single session.

Original language	English
Journal	European Journal of Applied Physiology
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2
State	Accepted/In press - 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.

Keywords

Cardiorespiratory fitness
Cycle ergometry
Endurance training
Metabolic intensity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Physiology (medical)

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2

Cite this

@article{1eb4a317e08b4de89141811b138d856e,

title = "Vigorous intensity heart rate-clamp exercise does not elicit recommended oxygen consumption rates",

abstract = "Purpose: This study examined the power output adjustments and subsequent shifts in metabolic ({\.V}O2) demands as well as minute ventilation (V˙E), respiratory rate (RR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses during vigorous intensity (77–95% HRpeak) heart rate (HR)-clamp cycle ergometry. Methods: Fifteen males (mean ± SD age = 25.9 ± 4.4 years) performed a graded exercise test to exhaustion to determine peak parameters and three, randomly ordered, HR-clamp trials to exhaustion, up to 60 min, at the lower (HRL = 77% HRpeak), middle (HRM = 86% HRpeak), and higher (HRH = 95% HRpeak) end of the vigorous intensity range. Time course of changes were examined. Results: The times to exhaustion (Tlim) for the HRL, HRM, and HRH trials were 56.05 ± 10.09, 44.22 ± 19.00, and 9.74 ± 7.54 min, respectively. There were significant decreases in power output, V˙O2, and V˙E across time for each trial, but no changes in RR, and increases in RPE (p < 0.05). Responses were intensity specific for all variables such that mean values were lower for HRL than HRM, and HRL and HRM were lower than HRH. The mean V˙O2 (HRL = 56.7 ± 3.8, HRM = 68.1 ± 4.3, and HRH = 90.5 ± 3.3%V˙O2max) responses fell below the recommended V˙O2 range for vigorous exercise at 10%Tlim for HRL, and at 90%Tlim for HRM, but remained above the recommended {\.V}O2 range for vigorous exercise until 70% of Tlim for HRH. Conclusions: Only the HRM trial met the current guidelines of a vigorous intensity V˙O2 sustained for at least 20 min. This study indicated that HR-clamp exercise cannot be consistently used to prescribe a desired metabolic stimulus for exercise performed in a single session.",

keywords = "Cardiorespiratory fitness, Cycle ergometry, Endurance training, Metabolic intensity",

author = "Mitchinson, {Clara J.} and Djadmann Gustave and Succi, {Pasquale J.} and Brian Benitez and Minyoung Kwak and Bergstrom, {Haley C.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.",

year = "2024",

doi = "10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2",

language = "English",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Vigorous intensity heart rate-clamp exercise does not elicit recommended oxygen consumption rates

AU - Mitchinson, Clara J.

AU - Gustave, Djadmann

AU - Succi, Pasquale J.

AU - Benitez, Brian

AU - Kwak, Minyoung

AU - Bergstrom, Haley C.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - Purpose: This study examined the power output adjustments and subsequent shifts in metabolic (V̇O2) demands as well as minute ventilation (V˙E), respiratory rate (RR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses during vigorous intensity (77–95% HRpeak) heart rate (HR)-clamp cycle ergometry. Methods: Fifteen males (mean ± SD age = 25.9 ± 4.4 years) performed a graded exercise test to exhaustion to determine peak parameters and three, randomly ordered, HR-clamp trials to exhaustion, up to 60 min, at the lower (HRL = 77% HRpeak), middle (HRM = 86% HRpeak), and higher (HRH = 95% HRpeak) end of the vigorous intensity range. Time course of changes were examined. Results: The times to exhaustion (Tlim) for the HRL, HRM, and HRH trials were 56.05 ± 10.09, 44.22 ± 19.00, and 9.74 ± 7.54 min, respectively. There were significant decreases in power output, V˙O2, and V˙E across time for each trial, but no changes in RR, and increases in RPE (p < 0.05). Responses were intensity specific for all variables such that mean values were lower for HRL than HRM, and HRL and HRM were lower than HRH. The mean V˙O2 (HRL = 56.7 ± 3.8, HRM = 68.1 ± 4.3, and HRH = 90.5 ± 3.3%V˙O2max) responses fell below the recommended V˙O2 range for vigorous exercise at 10%Tlim for HRL, and at 90%Tlim for HRM, but remained above the recommended V̇O2 range for vigorous exercise until 70% of Tlim for HRH. Conclusions: Only the HRM trial met the current guidelines of a vigorous intensity V˙O2 sustained for at least 20 min. This study indicated that HR-clamp exercise cannot be consistently used to prescribe a desired metabolic stimulus for exercise performed in a single session.

AB - Purpose: This study examined the power output adjustments and subsequent shifts in metabolic (V̇O2) demands as well as minute ventilation (V˙E), respiratory rate (RR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses during vigorous intensity (77–95% HRpeak) heart rate (HR)-clamp cycle ergometry. Methods: Fifteen males (mean ± SD age = 25.9 ± 4.4 years) performed a graded exercise test to exhaustion to determine peak parameters and three, randomly ordered, HR-clamp trials to exhaustion, up to 60 min, at the lower (HRL = 77% HRpeak), middle (HRM = 86% HRpeak), and higher (HRH = 95% HRpeak) end of the vigorous intensity range. Time course of changes were examined. Results: The times to exhaustion (Tlim) for the HRL, HRM, and HRH trials were 56.05 ± 10.09, 44.22 ± 19.00, and 9.74 ± 7.54 min, respectively. There were significant decreases in power output, V˙O2, and V˙E across time for each trial, but no changes in RR, and increases in RPE (p < 0.05). Responses were intensity specific for all variables such that mean values were lower for HRL than HRM, and HRL and HRM were lower than HRH. The mean V˙O2 (HRL = 56.7 ± 3.8, HRM = 68.1 ± 4.3, and HRH = 90.5 ± 3.3%V˙O2max) responses fell below the recommended V˙O2 range for vigorous exercise at 10%Tlim for HRL, and at 90%Tlim for HRM, but remained above the recommended V̇O2 range for vigorous exercise until 70% of Tlim for HRH. Conclusions: Only the HRM trial met the current guidelines of a vigorous intensity V˙O2 sustained for at least 20 min. This study indicated that HR-clamp exercise cannot be consistently used to prescribe a desired metabolic stimulus for exercise performed in a single session.

KW - Cardiorespiratory fitness

KW - Cycle ergometry

KW - Endurance training

KW - Metabolic intensity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85210745009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85210745009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2

DO - 10.1007/s00421-024-05665-2

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85210745009

SN - 1439-6319

JO - European Journal of Applied Physiology

JF - European Journal of Applied Physiology

ER -

Vigorous intensity heart rate-clamp exercise does not elicit recommended oxygen consumption rates

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this