Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci
ABSTRACT The original Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) offers a safe preliminary screening of candidates for exercise testing and prescription, but it screens out what seems an excessive proportion of apparently healthy older adults. To reduce unnecessary exclusions, an expert committee established by Fitness Canada has now revised the questionnaire wording. The present study compares responses to the original and the revised PAR-Q questionnaire in 399 men and women attending 40 accredited fitness testing centres across Canada. The number of subjects screened out by the revised test decreased significantly (p < .05), from 68 to 48 of the 399 subjects. The change reflects in part the inclusion of individuals who had made an erroneous positive response to the original question regarding high blood pressure. There is no simple gold standard to provide an objective evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of either questionnaire format, but the revised wording has apparently had the intended effect of reducing positive responses, particularly to the question regarding an elevation of blood pressure.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "General exclusion criteria were: surgery of the pelvis or spinal column; scoliosis; systemic or degenerative disease; body mass index (BMI) over 31.5 kg 2 /m (women) or 33 kg 2 /m (men); one positive response to the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire [Thomas et al., 1992]; history of neurological diseases or deficits not related to back pain (e.g., stroke, peripheral neuropathies, balance deficits); anticonvulsive, antidepressive or anxiolitic medication (use of antispasmodic, anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs for back pain was accepted); pregnancy or claustrophobia . The patients with CLBP were recruited through the Montreal "
ABSTRACT: Adequate neuromuscular control of the lumbar spine is required to prevent lumbar injuries. A trunk postural control test protocol, controlling for the influence of body size on performance, was implemented to carry out between-subject comparisons. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of sex and low back pain status with the use of two measures of trunk postural control, the first based on chair motion, and the second based on trunk motion. Thirty-six subjects (with and without low back pain) performed three 60-s trunk postural control trials with their eyes closed while seated on an instrumented wobble chair, following a calibration procedure. Chair and trunk angular kinematics were measured with an optoelectronic system. A chair-based stabilogram and a trunk-based (lumbar spine) stabilogram were created using the angular motions produced in the sagittal and frontal planes. Twenty body-sway measures were computed for each stabilogram. The calibration task efficiently controlled for the influence of body size. Several sex effects were detected, with most of them originating from the trunk-based measures. Subjects with low back pain and healthy controls showed comparable trunk postural control. Sex differences were substantiated for the first time, but almost only with the trunk-based stabilogram, showing that the kinematic information captured on the trunk segments is quite different from what is captured on the wobble chair. Contrary to previous studies, pain status was not related to lowered trunk postural control, which can be attributed to the patients recruited or measurement reliability issues. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) 07/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.07.006 · 1.88 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Each participant had at least six months of resistance training, and was physically active 2-3 times per week. All participants were required to pass a movement competency screening (MCS) test (Kritz, 2012) and a Pre- Exercise Questionnaire (PAR-Q) (Thomas et al. 1992) prior to acceptance for this study for safety reasons. The study was approved by the university research commitee, and prior to participation, the participants signed an informed consent letter. "
ABSTRACT: This paper aims to determine acute responses of standardized resistance training load on cardio-respiratory variables in recreationally active participants. The methodology involved twelve recreationally active males with an age of 23.5 (± 4.07) years, a mass of 70.5 (± 7.84 kg), a height of 1.69 (± 0.06 m), and a body mass index of 24.8 (± 2.14) kg/m2). The participants performed an exercise protocol that comprises five exercises on a standardized load. Each exercise was performed in a duration of 60 seconds with uncontrolled lifting velocity. Cardio-respiratory responses were measured using a portable metabolic system analyzer during the exercises. A wrist digital blood pressure monitor was used to determine pre- and post-protocol blood pressure responses. Based on the results, pre- and post-protocol systolic (p=0.744) and diastolic (p=0.758) blood pressure indicated no significant responses. However, significant differences were observed in pre- and post-heart rate responses (p=0.000). Peak cardio-respiratory responses recorded during the protocol were 30.2 (± 4.02) ml/Kg/min for oxygen consumption, 138 (± 61.9) bpm for heart rate, and 633 (± 71.2) kcal for energy expenditure (estimated per hour). On average, the Metabolic Equivalent of Task (MET) was recorded at a value of 8.62 (± 1.19). For a short duration standardized load circuit training exercise protocol, cardio respiratory responses were similar to other protocols. The metabolic cost of the predefined exercises was nearly half of the recommended energy expenditure through exercise per week. The prescribed protocol was comparable with other exercise protocols for cardiorespiratory variables. The single set protocol used was efficient in terms of caloric expenditure, and was less strenuous over similar exercise duration. Furthermore, the prescribed protocol is applicable and beneficial for active and healthy individuals.04/2015; 4(1). DOI:10.15282/mohe.v4i0.33
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Twenty-four adult career and volunteer firefighters from the State of Illinois with no self-reported health issues or orthopaedic or neuromuscular problems were recruited to participate in this study. Subjects completed a health history inventory and a physical activity readiness questionnaire (Thomas, Reading, and Shephard 1992) prior to testing. Based on these assessments, all participants were determined to be eligible for physical activity. "
ABSTRACT: For decades, research to quantify the effects of firefighting activities and personal protective equipment on physiology and biomechanics has been conducted in a variety of testing environments. It is unknown if these different environments provide similar information and comparable responses. A novel Firefighting Activities Station, which simulates four common fireground tasks, is presented for use with an environmental chamber in a controlled laboratory setting. Nineteen firefighters completed three different exercise protocols following common research practices. Simulated firefighting activities conducted in an environmental chamber or live-fire structures elicited similar physiological responses (max heart rate: 190.1 vs 188.0 bpm, core temperature response: 0.047°C/min vs 0.043°C/min) and accelerometry counts. However, the response to a treadmill protocol commonly used in laboratory settings resulted in significantly lower heart rate (178.4 vs 188.0 bpm), core temperature response (0.037°C/min vs 0.043°C/min) and physical activity counts compared with firefighting activities in the burn building.Ergonomics 01/2015; 58(6):1-10. DOI:10.1080/00140139.2014.997806 · 1.61 Impact Factor