The reliability and validity of fatigue measures during short-duration maximal-intensity intermittent cycling.
The purpose of the present study was to assess the reliability and validity of fatigue measures, as derived from 4 separate formulae, during tests of repeat sprint ability. On separate days over a 3-week period, 2 groups of 7 recreationally active men completed 6 trials of 1 of 2 maximal (20 x 5 seconds) intermittent cycling tests with contrasting recovery periods (10 or 30 seconds). All trials were conducted on a friction-braked cycle ergometer, and fatigue scores were derived from measures of mean power output for each sprint. Apart from formula 1, which calculated fatigue from the percentage difference in mean power output between the first and last sprint, all remaining formulae produced fatigue scores that showed a reasonably good level of test-retest reliability in both intermittent test protocols (intraclass correlation range: 0.78-0.86; 95% likely range of true values: 0.54-0.97). Although between-protocol differences in the magnitude of the fatigue scores suggested good construct validity, within-protocol differences highlighted limitations with each formula. Overall, the results support the use of the percentage decrement score as the most valid and reliable measure of fatigue during brief maximal intermittent work.
Department of Physical Education, Sport, and Leisure Studies, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom. glaistem@smuc.ac.uk
Mark
M
Glaister
Michael H
MH
Stone
Andrew M
AM
Stewart
Michael
M
Hughes
Gavin L
GL
Moir
D000328:Adult; D001642:Bicycling / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D018763:Muscle Fatigue / Q000502:physiology*; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000502:physiology; D005082:Physical Exertion / Q000502:physiology; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013178:Sports Medicine / Q000379:methods*