Content uploaded by Natharin Boontha
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Natharin Boontha on Mar 01, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
344
Reliability of heart rate maximizer test using jumping jack
in assessing cardiovascular fitness
กฤษณา บุญทา* อุบล พิรุณสาร เพียรชัย ค�าวงษ์ สายนที ปรารถนาผล
Kritsana Boontha* Ubon Pirunsan Peanchai Khamwong Sainatee Pratanaphon
ภาควิชากายภาพบ�าบัด คณะเทคนิคการแพทย์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ จังหวัดเชียงใหม่
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
* ผู้รับผิดชอบบทความ (Email: kritsana.b@cmu.ac.th)
* Corresponding author (Email: kritsana.b@cmu.ac.th)
Received July 2016
Accepted as revised September 2016
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of a heart rate maximizer test using jumping
jack to evaluate cardiovascular fitness in young adults.
Materials and methods: Twenty healthy young adults (mean age 21.20±0.95 years) underwent two minutes of
the heart rate maximizer test, followed by 10 minutes of seated rest on two occasions separated by seven days.
Variables included resting heart rate (HRrest), peak heart rate (HRpeak), heart rate after testing at 1st and 2nd minute,
heart rate recovery at 1st and 2nd minute (HRR1 and HRR2), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and rating of perceived
exertion (RPE) were evaluated. Reliability of the test was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard
error of measurements (SEMs) and coefficient of variation (CV).
Results: All HR variables were excellent reliable (ICC = 0.90-0.98; SEMs = 1.14%-7.89%) as well as SBP variables
(ICC = 0.90-0.91; SEMs = 2.87%-3.70%) with less than 15% of CV except HRR1 (CV = 29.8%). RPE measurements
were slightly less reliable (ICC = 0.62-0.75; SEMs = 3.13%-7.42%; CV = 5.1%-14.8%) than HR and SBP measurements.
Therefore, both HR and SBP variables can be reliably applied in the heart rate maximizer test.
Conclusion: Heart rate maximizer test using jumping jack showed high reliability and it could be useful for accessing
cardiovascular fitness in healthy young adults.
Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 2016; 49(3): 344-354
Keywords: Heart rate maximizer test, heart rate recovery, rating of perceived exertion, systolic blood pressure
. Doi: 10.14456/jams.2016.34
344
Reliability of heart rate maximizer test using jumping jack
in assessing cardiovascular fitness
กฤษณา บุญทา* อุบล พิรุณสาร เพียรชัย ค�าวงษ์ สายนที ปรารถนาผล
Kritsana Boontha* Ubon Pirunsan Peanchai Khamwong Sainatee Pratanaphon
ภาควิชากายภาพบ�าบัด คณะเทคนิคการแพทย์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ จังหวัดเชียงใหม่
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
* ผู้รับผิดชอบบทความ (Email: kritsana.b@cmu.ac.th)
* Corresponding author (Email: kritsana.b@cmu.ac.th)
Received July 2016
Accepted as revised September 2016
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of a heart rate maximizer test using jumping
jack to evaluate cardiovascular fitness in young adults.
Materials and methods: Twenty healthy young adults (mean age 21.20±0.95 years) underwent two minutes of
the heart rate maximizer test, followed by 10 minutes of seated rest on two occasions separated by seven days.
Variables included resting heart rate (HRrest), peak heart rate (HRpeak), heart rate after testing at 1st and 2nd minute,
heart rate recovery at 1st and 2nd minute (HRR1 and HRR2), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and rating of perceived
exertion (RPE) were evaluated. Reliability of the test was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard
error of measurements (SEMs) and coefficient of variation (CV).
Results: All HR variables were excellent reliable (ICC = 0.90-0.98; SEMs = 1.14%-7.89%) as well as SBP variables
(ICC = 0.90-0.91; SEMs = 2.87%-3.70%) with less than 15% of CV except HRR1 (CV = 29.8%). RPE measurements
were slightly less reliable (ICC = 0.62-0.75; SEMs = 3.13%-7.42%; CV = 5.1%-14.8%) than HR and SBP measurements.
Therefore, both HR and SBP variables can be reliably applied in the heart rate maximizer test.
Conclusion: Heart rate maximizer test using jumping jack showed high reliability and it could be useful for accessing
cardiovascular fitness in healthy young adults.
Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 2016; 49(3): 344-354
Keywords: Heart rate maximizer test, heart rate recovery, rating of perceived exertion, systolic blood pressure
Vol. 49 No. 3 September 2016 Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 345
1,2
ป่ 3
2
4
5,6
2
บทน�า
2
rate, HR)7-9
exertion, RPE)7,10,11
12,13
14
recovery, HRR)15-17
218,19
บทคัดย่อ
วัตถุประสงค์:
วัสดุและวิธีการศึกษา:
restpeak)
ผลการศึกษา:
สรุปผลการศึกษา:
วารสารเทคนิคการแพทย์เชียงใหม่ 2559; 49(3): 344-354
ค�ารหัส:
. Doi: 10.14456/jams.2016.34
346
20-22
9
19,21,23,24
Power 90 Extreme (P90X, the Beachbody Company)
25,26
26
27
70%HRmax
2 30
31
College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)32
Preparticipation Screening Questionnaire33
90%HRmax
28
29
4
submaximal exercise 70%HRmax
90%HRmax
maximal exercise test
1.
18-25VO2max
Dai 95w)
0.2type I error) 5power)
0.800.90 18
drop out) 10n = 2
20
The
American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
AHA/ACSM Health/Fitness Facility Preparticipation Screening
Questionnaire33“” “” “”
2“”
(AMSEC-59FB-001)
2. (heart rate maximizer test)27
Boontha
27
2
30
peak heart rate, HRpeak) 70%HRmax10
angina)
346
20-22
9
19,21,23,24
Power 90 Extreme (P90X, the Beachbody Company)
25,26
26
27
70%HRmax
2 30
31
College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)32
Preparticipation Screening Questionnaire33
90%HRmax
28
29
4
submaximal exercise 70%HRmax
90%HRmax
maximal exercise test
1.
18-25VO2max
Dai 95w)
0.2type I error) 5power)
0.800.90 18
drop out) 10n = 2
20
The
American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
AHA/ACSM Health/Fitness Facility Preparticipation Screening
Questionnaire33“” “” “”
2“”
(AMSEC-59FB-001)
2. (heart rate maximizer test)27
Boontha
27
2
30
peak heart rate, HRpeak) 70%HRmax10
angina)
Vol. 49 No. 3 September 2016 Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 347
27
27
peak
70%HRmax
4
33
®
TM
transporeTM
®,
rest
peak), HR
1min 2min
peak-HRr1min
HRR2 = HRpeak - HRr2min15, 20, 34max
max35max
max = 100 x (HRpeak x HRmax-1)
scale)36
rest
peak)
348
ความดันโลหิตสูงสุดขณะหัวใจบีบตัว (systolic blood
pressure, SBP)
(Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor model HEM-7203,
®
1min)
5. การวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล
correlation coefficient model 3,1 (ICC3,1
rest, HRpeak, HRr1min, HRr2min,
1. ข้อมูลทั ่วไปของอาสาสมัคร
p
(Table 1)
ผลการศึกษา
37
-1
Table 1
All participants (n=20)
Age (years) 21.20±0.95
Height (cm.) 164.85±10.16
60.33±13.53
BMI (kg.m-2) 21.98±3.25
Average HRrestTrials 1 (bpm) 76.25±9.12
Average HRrest Trials 2 (bpm) 76.65±9.49
%HRmaxTrials 1 89.21±4.43
%HRmaxTrials 2 89.21±3.78
Abnormal signs or symptoms no
6
ความดันโลหิตสูงสุดขณะหัวใจบีบตัว (systolic blood pressure, SBP)
Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor model HEM-
7203, OMRON®, Japan) (millimeter of mercury, mmHg)
(Average SBPrest)1
(SBPr1min)
5. การวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล
Mean±SD) Kolmogorov Smirnov Paired samples t- test
1 2 Intraclass correlation coefficient model 3,1 (ICC3,1)
test-retest reliability) Average HRrest, HRpeak,
HRr1min, HRr2min, HRR1 HRR2RPE SBP
ICC 0.4 ICC 0.4-0.75
ICC 0.75ICC 0.90
37standard error of
measurements, SEMs) SEMs = S x √1 − ICCS
ICC 95%
(coefficient of variation, CV) CV (%) = 100 x (SD x mean-1)
SPSS version 17.0 Windows
Note: bpm: beats per minute; cm: centimeter; kg: kilogram; kg.m-2: kilogram per square meter; BMI: body mass index; HRmax: maximal heart rate;
HRrest: resting heart rate
348
ความดันโลหิตสูงสุดขณะหัวใจบีบตัว (systolic blood
pressure, SBP)
(Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor model HEM-7203,
®
1min)
5. การวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล
correlation coefficient model 3,1 (ICC3,1
rest, HRpeak, HRr1min, HRr2min,
1. ข้อมูลทั ่วไปของอาสาสมัคร
p
(Table 1)
ผลการศึกษา
37
-1
Table 1
All participants (n=20)
Age (years) 21.20±0.95
Height (cm.) 164.85±10.16
60.33±13.53
BMI (kg.m-2) 21.98±3.25
Average HRrestTrials 1 (bpm) 76.25±9.12
Average HRrest Trials 2 (bpm) 76.65±9.49
%HRmaxTrials 1 89.21±4.43
%HRmaxTrials 2 89.21±3.78
Abnormal signs or symptoms no
6
ความดันโลหิตสูงสุดขณะหัวใจบีบตัว (systolic blood pressure, SBP)
Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor model HEM-
7203, OMRON®, Japan) (millimeter of mercury, mmHg)
(Average SBPrest)1
(SBPr1min)
5. การวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล
Mean±SD) Kolmogorov Smirnov Paired samples t- test
1 2 Intraclass correlation coefficient model 3,1 (ICC3,1)
test-retest reliability) Average HRrest, HRpeak,
HRr1min, HRr2min, HRR1 HRR2RPE SBP
ICC 0.4 ICC 0.4-0.75
ICC 0.75ICC 0.90
37standard error of
measurements, SEMs) SEMs = S x √1 − ICCS
ICC 95%
(coefficient of variation, CV) CV (%) = 100 x (SD x mean-1)
SPSS version 17.0 Windows
Note: bpm: beats per minute; cm: centimeter; kg: kilogram; kg.m-2: kilogram per square meter; BMI: body mass index; HRmax: maximal heart rate;
HRrest: resting heart rate
Vol. 49 No. 3 September 2016 Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 349
Table 2 Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), 95% confidence interval (95% CI), standard error of measurements
(SEMs) and coefficient of variation (CV) of all measurements (n=20).
Note: bpm: beats per minute; min: minute; mmHg: millimeter mercury; HR: heart rate; HRrest: resting heart rate; HRpeak: peak heart rate; HRr1min:
heart rate during recovery period at 1st minute; HRr2min: heart rate during recovery period at 2nd minute; HRR1: heart rate recovery at 1st
minute; HRR2: heart rate recovery at 2nd minute; RPE: rating of perceived exertion; RPErest: resting rating of perceived exertion; RPEpeak:
peak rating of perceived exertion; SBP: systolic blood pressure; SBPrest: resting systolic blood pressure; SBPr1min: systolic blood pressure
during recovery period at 1st minute; SD: standard deviation.
Measurements ICC 95% CI
Trial 1 Trial 2
Average HRrest 76.25±9.12 76.65±9.49 0.98 (0.94-0.99) 1.89
(2.67%)
10.9
HRpeak 177.35±8.85 177.35±7.60 0.94 (0.84-0.97) 2.01
(1.14%)
4.6
HRr1min 135.50±11.57 134.35±11.76 0.96 (0.89-0.98) 2.33
(1.73%)
8.6
HRr2min 115.75±11.73 116.35±11.43 0.93 (0.84-0.97) 3.06
(2.64%)
10.0
HRR1 41.85±12.70 43.00±12.60 0.93 (0.82-0.97) 3.35
(7.89%)
29.8
HRR2 61.60±13.20 61.00±13.08 0.90 (0.77-0.96) 2.40
(4.03%)
12.8
Average RPErest 6.10±0.31 6.10±0.31 0.62 (0.28-0.85) 0.19
(3.13%)
5.1
RPEpeak 16.75±2.00 15.65±2.81 0.75 (0.48-0.90) 1.20
(7.42%)
14.8
Average SBPrest 112.70±9.40 112.43±11.01 0.90 (0.75-0.96) 3.23
(2.87%)
9.1
SBPr1min 150.15±19.72 149.25±17.17 0.91 (0.78-0.96) 5.53
(3.70%)
12.3
350
27
3,1
rest, HRpeak, HRr1 min, HRr2 min,
≥
max
37
20,38,39
rest, HRpeak1 min
40
16
max
18, 38, 41
38
วิจารณ์ผลการศึกษา
38
20, 42
38
43
rest
1 min
44
41
HRpeak
350
27
3,1
rest, HRpeak, HRr1 min, HRr2 min,
≥
max
37
20,38,39
rest, HRpeak1 min
40
16
max
18, 38, 41
38
วิจารณ์ผลการศึกษา
38
20, 42
38
43
rest
1 min
44
41
HRpeak
Vol. 49 No. 3 September 2016 Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 351
สรุปผลการศึกษา
กิตติกรรมประกาศ
18
352
mayocp.2013.02.013
2013. p. 1-38.
from the American Heart Association Council on clinical cardiology, subcommittee on exercise, cardiac
chest.105.5.1365
using heart rate monitors to assess cardiorespiratory fitness and heart rate recovery in an asymptomatic population.
10.1097/JSM.0000000000000190
-
เอกสารอ้างอิง
352
mayocp.2013.02.013
2013. p. 1-38.
from the American Heart Association Council on clinical cardiology, subcommittee on exercise, cardiac
chest.105.5.1365
using heart rate monitors to assess cardiorespiratory fitness and heart rate recovery in an asymptomatic population.
10.1097/JSM.0000000000000190
-
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Vol. 49 No. 3 September 2016 Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 353
16. Cole CR, Foody JM, Blackstone EH, Lauer MS. Heart rate recovery after submaximal exercise testing as a predictor
of mortality in a cardiovascularly healthy cohort. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132(7): 552-5. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-
132-7-200004040-00007
17. Lahiri MK, Kannankeril PJ, Goldberger JJ. Assessment of autonomic function in cardiovascular disease:
physiological basis and prognostic implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 51(18): 1725-33. doi: 10.1016/j.
jacc.2008.01.038.
18. Mann TN, Webster C, Lamberts RP, Lambert MI. Effect of exercise intensity on post-exercise oxygen consumption
and heart rate recovery. Eur J Appl Physiol 2014; 114(9): 1809-20. doi: 10.1007/s00421-014-2907-9
19. Cataldo A, Cerasola D, Zangla D, Russo G, Sahin FN, Traina M. Assessment of autonomic function as marker of
training status: the role of heart rate recovery after exercise. Eur J Sport Sci 2014; 2(1): 89-97. doi: 10.12863/
ejssbx2x1-2014x3
20. Shetler K, Marcus R, Froelicher VF, Vora S, Kalisetti D, Prakash M, et al. Heart rate recovery: validation and
methodologic issues. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 38(7): 1980-7. doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01652-7
21. Peçanha T, Silva-Júnior ND, Forjaz CLdM. Heart rate recovery: autonomic determinants, methods of assessment
and association with mortality and cardiovascular diseases. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2014; 34(5): 327-39.
doi: 10.1111/cpf.12102
22. Lamberts RP, Maskell S, Borresen J, Lambert MI. Adapting workload improves the measurement of heart rate
recovery. Int J Sports Med 2011; 32(09): 698-702. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1275357
23. Itoh H, Ajisaka R, Koike A, Makita S, Omiya K, Kato Y, et al. Heart rate and blood pressure response to ramp
exercise and exercise capacity in relation to age, gender, and mode of exercise in a healthy population.
J Cardiol 2013; 61(1): 71-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2012.09.010
24. Maeder M, Ammann P, Rickli H, Brunner-La Rocca H. Impact of the exercise mode on heart rate recovery after
maximal exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol 2009; 105(2): 247-55. doi: 10.1007/s00421-008-0896-2
25. Wikipedia tfe. P90x: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia; 2016 [updated 2016 May 28; cited 2016 June 14].
Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P90X.
26. Team Beachbody. The fit test (Excerpted from the P90X fitness guide) [cited 2016 June 14]. Available from:
https://www.beachbody.com/text/products/programs/p90x/p90xFitTest.pdf.
27. Boontha K, Pirunsan U, Khamwong P. Cardiovascular response and energy expenditure of a novel heart rate
maximizer test in healthy volunteers. Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 2016; 49(2): 263-75. doi:
28. Loe H, Steinshamn S, Wisløff U. Cardio-respiratory reference data in 4631 healthy men and women 20-90
years: the HUNT 3 fitness study. PLoS ONE 2014; 9(11): e113884. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113884
29. Wheatley CM, Snyder EM, Johnson BD, Olson TP. Sex differences in cardiovascular function during submaximal
exercise in humans. SpringerPlus 2014; 3(1): 445. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-445
30. Loe H, Rognmo Ø, Saltin B, Wisløff U. Aerobic capacity reference data in 3816 healthy men and women 20–90 years.
PLoS ONE 2013; 8(5): e64319. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064319
31. Dai H, Charnigo R, Vyhlidal CA, Jones BL, Bhandary M. Mixed modeling and sample size calculations for
identifying housekeeping genes. Stat Med 2013; 32(18): 3115-25. doi: 10.1002/sim.5768
32. Riebe D, Franklin BA, Thompson PD, Garber CE, Whitfield GP, Magal M, et al. Updating ACSM’s recommendations
for exercise preparticipation health screening. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2015; 47(11): 2473-9. doi: 10.1249/
354
MSS.0000000000000664
00149619-201307000-00004
10.1111/j.1475-097X.2012.01125.x