The validity of power output recorded during exercise performance tests using a Kingcycle air-braked cycle ergometer when compared with an SRM powermeter.
This study assessed the validity of power output recorded using an air-braked cycle ergometer (Kingcycle) when compared with a power measuring crankset (SRM). For part one of the study thirteen physically active subjects completed a continuous incremental exercise test (OBLA), for part two of the study twelve trained cyclists completed two tests; a maximal aerobic power test (MAP) and a 16.1 km time-trial (16.1 km TT). The following were compared; the peak power output (PPO) recorded for 1 min during MAP, the average power output for the duration of the time-trial and power output recorded during each stage of OBLA. For all tests, power output recorded using Kingcycle was significantly higher than SRM (P < 0.001). Ratio limits of agreement between SRM and Kingcycle for OBLA showed a bias (P < 0.00) of 0.90 (95%CI = 0.90-0.91) with a random error of X or / 1.07, and for PPO and 16.1 km TT ratio limits of agreement were 0.90 (95%CI = 0.88-0.92) X or / 1.07 and 0.92 (95% CI = 0.90-0.94) X or / 1.07, respectively. These data revealed that the Kingcycle ergometry system did not provide a valid measure of power output when compared with SRM.
Balmer
J
J
Department of Sport Science, Canterbury Christ Church University College, United Kingdom. j.balmer@cant.ac.uk
Davison
R C
RC
Coleman
D A
DA
Bird
S R
SR
D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001642:Bicycling / Q000502:physiology*; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D016552:Ergometry / Q000295:instrumentation*; D006801:Humans; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000502:physiology*; D010807:Physical Endurance; D012044:Regression Analysis; D015203:Reproducibility of Results