Comparison of RPE (Rating of Perceived Exertion) Scales for Session RPE

被引:94
作者
Arney, Blaine E. [1 ]
Glover, Reese [1 ]
Fusco, Andrea [2 ,3 ]
Cortis, Cristina [2 ]
de Koning, Jos J. [1 ,4 ]
van Erp, Teun [4 ]
Jaime, Salvador [1 ]
Mikat, Richard P. [1 ]
Porcari, John P. [1 ]
Foster, Carl [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Exercise & Sport Sci, La Crosse, WI 54601 USA
[2] Univ Cassino & Lazio Merid, Dept Human Sci Soc & Hlth, Cassino, Italy
[3] Univ Salzburg, Dept Sport Sci & Kinesiol, Salzburg, Austria
[4] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Human Movement Sci, Amsterdam Movement Sci, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
training; training monitoring; rating of perceived exertion; TRAINING LOAD;
D O I
10.1123/ijspp.2018-0637
中图分类号
Q4 [生理学];
学科分类号
071003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) is a well-accepted method of monitoring training load in athletes in many different sports. It is based on the category-ratio (0-10) RPE scale (BORG-CR10) developed by Borg. There is no evidence how substitution of the Borg 6-20 RPE scale (BORG-RPE) might influence the sRPE in athletes. Methods: Systematically training, recreational-level athletes from a number of sport disciplines performed 6 randomly ordered, 30-min interval-training sessions, at intensities based on peak power output (PPO) and designed to be easy (50% PPO), moderate (75% PPO), or hard (85% PPO). Ratings of sRPE were obtained 30 min postexercise using either the BORG-CR10 or BORG-RPE and compared for matched exercise conditions. Results: The average percentage of heart-rate reserve was well correlated with sRPE from both BORG-CR10 (r = .76) and BORG-RPE (r = .69). The sRPE ratings from BORG-CR10 and BORG-RPE were very strongly correlated (r = .90) at matched times. Conclusions: Although producing different absolute numbers, sRPE derived from either the BORG-CR10 or BORG-RPE provides essentially interchangeable estimates of perceived exercise training intensity.
引用
收藏
页码:994 / 996
页数:3
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1998, BORGS PERCEIVED EXER
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2002, New View of Statistics: Effect Magnitudes
[3]  
Arney BE., Kinesiology
[4]  
Banister E., 1991, Physiological Testing of Elite Athletes
[5]   The Quantification of Training Load, the Training Response and the Effect on Performance [J].
Borresen, Jill ;
Lambert, Michael Ian .
SPORTS MEDICINE, 2009, 39 (09) :779-795
[6]   EFFECTS OF SPECIFIC VERSUS CROSS-TRAINING ON RUNNING PERFORMANCE [J].
FOSTER, C ;
HECTOR, LL ;
WELSH, R ;
SCHRAGER, M ;
GREEN, MA ;
SNYDER, AC .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY AND OCCUPATIONAL PHYSIOLOGY, 1995, 70 (04) :367-372
[7]   A new approach to monitoring exercise training [J].
Foster, C ;
Florhaug, JA ;
Franklin, J ;
Gottschall, L ;
Hrovatin, LA ;
Parker, S ;
Doleshal, P ;
Dodge, C .
JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2001, 15 (01) :109-115
[8]  
Foster C, 2017, INT J SPORT PHYSIOL, V12, P2, DOI [10.1123/IJSPP.2016-0388, 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0388]
[9]   Use of RPE-based training load in soccer [J].
Impellizzeri, FM ;
Rampinini, E ;
Coutts, AJ ;
Sassi, A ;
Marcora, SM .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2004, 36 (06) :1042-1047
[10]   Validity of the Online Athlete Management System to Assess Training Load [J].
Menaspa, Miranda J. ;
Menaspa, Paolo ;
Clark, Sally A. ;
Fanchini, Maurizio .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE, 2018, 13 (06) :750-754