Reproducibility of Limb Power Outputs and Cardiopulmonary Responses to Exercise Using a Novel Swimming Training Machine

Canterbury Christ Church University, Department of Sport Science, Tourism and Leisure, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
International Journal of Sports Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.07). 10/2010; 31(12):854-9. DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1265175
Source: PubMed


The purpose of this study was to determine the reproducibility of limb power outputs and cardiopulmonary responses, to incremental whole-body exercise using a novel swimming training machine. 8 swimmers with a mean age of 23.7 ± 4.6 (yrs), stature 1.77 ± 0.13 (m) and body mass of 74.7 ± 2.8 (kg) gave informed consent and participated in repeat exercise testing on the machine. All subjects performed 2 incremental exercise tests to exhaustion using front crawl movements. From these tests peak oxygen consumption (VO(₂peak)), peak heart rate (HR(peak)), peak power output (W (peak)) and individual limb power outputs were determined. Results showed there were no significant differences between test 1 and 2 for any variable at exhaustion, and the CV% ranged from 2.8 to 3.4%. The pooled mean values were; VO(₂peak) 3.7 ± 0.65 L.min⁻¹, HR (peak) 178.7 ± 6.6 b.min⁻¹ and W (peak) 349.7 ± 16.5 W. The mean contributions to the total power output from the legs and arms were (37.3 ± 4.1% and 62.7 ± 5.1% respectively). These results show that it is possible to measure individual limb power outputs and cardiopulmonary parameters reproducibly during whole-body exercise using this training machine, at a range of exercise intensities.

Download full-text


Available from: Ian Swaine, Mar 15, 2014
  • Source
    • "In fact, higher correlations were reported between power and shorter distance swam (25 m vs. 100 m). However, the specificity of leg movements in order to produce propulsion in water seems quite different from the movements used in cycle ergometer (Swaine et al., 2010). Therefore, this higher correlation in shorter distances may be explained by the push of the wall in the start and the turning benefit (Keskinen et al., 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The main aim of the present study was to analyze the relationships between dry land strength and power measurements with swimming performance. Ten male national level swimmers (age: 14.9 ± 0.74 years, body mass: 60.0 ± 6.26 kg, height: 171.9 ± 6.26, 100 m long course front crawl performance: 59.9 ± 1.87 s) volunteered as subjects. Height and Work were estimated for CMJ. Mean power in the propulsive phase was assessed for squat, bench press (concentric phase) and lat pull down back. Mean force production was evaluated through 30 s maximal effort tethered swimming in front crawl using whole body, arms only and legs only. Swimming velocity was calculated from a maximal bout of 50 m front crawl. Height of CMJ did not correlate with any of the studied variables. There were positive and moderate-strong associations between the work during CMJ and mean propulsive power in squat with tethered forces during whole body and legs only swimming. Mean propulsive power of bench press and lat pull down presented positive and moderate-strong relationships with mean force production in whole body and arms only. Swimming performance is related with mean power of lat pull down back. So, lat pull down back is the most related dry land test with swimming performance; bench press with force production in water arms only; and work during CMJ with tethered forces legs only.
    Journal of Human Kinetics 09/2011; 29A:105-12. DOI:10.2478/v10078-011-0065-2 · 1.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Our objective was to investigate the reliability of a newly developed whole body water ergometer (Reha-Aquabike). Materials and methods: 12 healthy subjects performed repeated exercise tests. There were 4 tests which included combined arm-leg-ergometry (A+B) and cycling alone (B) in water (W) and on land (L). A revolution and a step protocol were followed. Oxygen and carbon dioxide were measured to calculate gas exchange. The scatter of the oxygen consumption (VO 2 ) values was analyzed with the Bland-Altman method and ANOVA. Results: The results of the repeated tests showed no diff erence in the means (p > 0.05). Limits of agreement were 68.9 ± 423 ml*min − 1 (A+B) and 69.7 ± 354 ml*min − 1 (B) and included 95 % of the values. Discussion: The repeated measures of VO 2 were comparable and the step protocol was reproducible. Conclusions: The cut-off -points of the Reha- Aquabike are adequate and the control system is accurate.
    Physikalische Medizin Rehabilitationsmedizin Kurortmedizin 05/2012; DOI:10.1055/s-0032-1314863 · 0.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Determining the efficiency of a swimming stroke is difficult because different "efficiencies" can be computed based on the partitioning of mechanical power output (W) into its useful and nonuseful components, as well as because of the difficulties in measuring the forces that a swimmer can exert in water. In this paper, overall efficiency (η(O) = W(TOT)/Ė, where W(TOT) is total mechanical power output, and Ė is overall metabolic power input) was calculated in 10 swimmers by means of a laboratory-based whole-body swimming ergometer, whereas propelling efficiency (η(P) = W(D)/W(TOT), where W(D) is the power to overcome drag) was estimated based on these values and on values of drag efficiency (η(D) = W(D)/Ė): η(P) = η(D)/η(O). The values of η(D) reported in the literature range from 0.03 to 0.09 (based on data for passive and active drag, respectively). η(O) was 0.28 ± 0.01, and η(P) was estimated to range from ≈ 0.10 (η(D) = 0.03) to 0.35 (η(D) = 0.09). Even if there are obvious limitations to exact simulation of the whole swimming stroke within the laboratory, these calculations suggest that the data reported in the literature for η(O) are probably underestimated, because not all components of W(TOT) can be measured accurately in this environment. Similarly, our estimations of η(P) suggest that the data reported in the literature are probably overestimated.
    Journal of Applied Physiology 06/2012; 113(4):584-94. DOI:10.1152/japplphysiol.00324.2012 · 3.06 Impact Factor
Show more