Abstract des Autors

In 1926, A. V. Hill stated that maximal oxygen consumption (VO2 max) is reached when oxygen consumption (VO2) has achieved "its maximum and remains constant ... owing to the limitations of the circulatory and respiratory systems". Consequently, the direct measurement of VO2 max is regarded as the criterion measure of cardiovascular fitness and as an objective measure of an individual's capacity to perform physical work. However, direct measurement of VO2 max is costly, time consuming, and technical; requires trained personnel, contraindicated for some individuals; and is many times impractical. As a result of these concerns, many indirect, submaximal methods for estimating VO2 max have been developed. The ability of submaximal testing to provide a reasonable estimate of VO2 max allows the fitness professional to classify a client's fitness level, stratify their risk for exercise, and design an optimal exercise prescription that will provide beneficial outcomes. While the prediction of VO2 max form submaximal testing affords the fitness professional with valuable information, care must be taken in performing testing and interpreting the results. Astrand reported that any submaximal test used to predict VO2 max has a 10-15 % error. The tendency for prediction models developed for submaximal testing is to underestimate VO2 max for untrained individuals and to overestimate VO2 max for trained individuals. These errors in predicting VO2 max result from violations of the 3 basic assumptions of submaximal testing and/or failure inherent in any prediction model. This paper will review the assumptions underlying submaximal testing as a means to predict VO2 max. In addition, selected submaximal tests with recommendations of how fitness professionals may incorporate these tests into their practice will be presented. Verf.-Referat