PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To compare performance data of adolescents collected with five different bicycle spiroergometry protocols and to assess the necessity for establishing standard values for each protocol.
METHODS: One-hundred-twenty adolescents completed two bicycle spiroergometries within 14 days. One of the two tests was performed based on our institutional weight-adapted protocol (P0). The other test was performed based on one out of four exercise protocols widely used for children and adolescents (P1, 2, 3 or 4) with 30 persons each. The two tests were performed in a random order. Routine parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) such as VO2peak, maximum power, O2 pulse, OUES, VE/VCO2 slope as well as ventilatory and lactate thresholds were investigated. Agreement between protocols was evaluated by Bland-Altman analysis, coefficients of variation (CV) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC).
RESULTS: None of the CPET parameters were significantly different between P0 and P1, 2, 3 or 4. For most of the parameters, low biases between P0 and P1-P4 were found and 95% confidence intervalls were narrow. CV and ICC values largely corresponded to well-defined analytical goals (CV < 10% and ICC > 0.9). Only maximal power (Pmax) showed differences in size and drift of the bias depending on the length of the step duration of the protocols.
CONCLUSIONS: Comparability between examination protocols has been shown for CPET parameters independent on step duration. Protocol-dependent standard values do not appear to be necessary. Only Pmax is dependent on the step duration, but in most cases, this has no significant influence on the fitness assessment.
METHODS: One-hundred-twenty adolescents completed two bicycle spiroergometries within 14 days. One of the two tests was performed based on our institutional weight-adapted protocol (P0). The other test was performed based on one out of four exercise protocols widely used for children and adolescents (P1, 2, 3 or 4) with 30 persons each. The two tests were performed in a random order. Routine parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) such as VO2peak, maximum power, O2 pulse, OUES, VE/VCO2 slope as well as ventilatory and lactate thresholds were investigated. Agreement between protocols was evaluated by Bland-Altman analysis, coefficients of variation (CV) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC).
RESULTS: None of the CPET parameters were significantly different between P0 and P1, 2, 3 or 4. For most of the parameters, low biases between P0 and P1-P4 were found and 95% confidence intervalls were narrow. CV and ICC values largely corresponded to well-defined analytical goals (CV < 10% and ICC > 0.9). Only maximal power (Pmax) showed differences in size and drift of the bias depending on the length of the step duration of the protocols.
CONCLUSIONS: Comparability between examination protocols has been shown for CPET parameters independent on step duration. Protocol-dependent standard values do not appear to be necessary. Only Pmax is dependent on the step duration, but in most cases, this has no significant influence on the fitness assessment.
摘要：
目的：比较使用五种不同的自行车肺活量测定方案收集的青少年的表现数据，并评估为每种方案建立标准值的必要性。
方法：一百二十名青少年在14天内完成了两次自行车肺活量测定。基于我们的机构权重适应方案(P0)进行两个测试之一。另一项测试是基于广泛用于儿童和青少年（P1，2，3或4）的四种运动方案中的一种进行的，每个30人。这两个测试以随机顺序进行。心肺运动试验（CPET）的常规参数，如VO2peak，最大功率,O2脉冲,OUES,研究了VE/VCO2斜率以及通气和乳酸阈值。协议之间的协议通过Bland-Altman分析进行了评估，变异系数(CV)和类内相关系数(ICC)。
结果：在P0和P1，2，3或4之间，没有任何CPET参数显着差异。对于大多数参数，发现P0和P1-P4之间存在低偏差,95%置信区间狭窄.CV和ICC值在很大程度上对应于明确定义的分析目标(CV<10%和ICC>0.9)。仅最大功率（Pmax）显示出偏差的大小和漂移差异，具体取决于方案的步进持续时间的长度。
结论：已显示CPET参数与步长无关的检查方案之间的可比性。取决于协议的标准值似乎是不必要的。只有Pmax取决于步进持续时间，但在大多数情况下,这对健身评估没有显著影响。
方法：一百二十名青少年在14天内完成了两次自行车肺活量测定。基于我们的机构权重适应方案(P0)进行两个测试之一。另一项测试是基于广泛用于儿童和青少年（P1，2，3或4）的四种运动方案中的一种进行的，每个30人。这两个测试以随机顺序进行。心肺运动试验（CPET）的常规参数，如VO2peak，最大功率,O2脉冲,OUES,研究了VE/VCO2斜率以及通气和乳酸阈值。协议之间的协议通过Bland-Altman分析进行了评估，变异系数(CV)和类内相关系数(ICC)。
结果：在P0和P1，2，3或4之间，没有任何CPET参数显着差异。对于大多数参数，发现P0和P1-P4之间存在低偏差,95%置信区间狭窄.CV和ICC值在很大程度上对应于明确定义的分析目标(CV<10%和ICC>0.9)。仅最大功率（Pmax）显示出偏差的大小和漂移差异，具体取决于方案的步进持续时间的长度。
结论：已显示CPET参数与步长无关的检查方案之间的可比性。取决于协议的标准值似乎是不必要的。只有Pmax取决于步进持续时间，但在大多数情况下,这对健身评估没有显著影响。
