Title

Wingate Test-Retest Variability in Healthy Subjects

ORCID

J. Mark Van Ness: 0000-0001-5902-8735

Document Type

Conference Presentation

Department

Health, Exercise, and Sport Sciences Department

Conference Title

2018 ACSM National Conference

Organization

American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)

Location

Minneapolis, MN

Conference Dates

May 29 - June 2, 2018

Date of Presentation

6-1-2018

Journal Publication

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

ISSN

1530-0315

DOI

10.1249/01.mss.0000538197.40788.08

Volume

50

Issue

5s

Publication Date

2018-05-01

First Page

666

Abstract

Learning effects, biological changes, and motivation contribute to variability in performance on standardized exercise tests. Performance improvement on short-duration, high- intensity tests, such as a 30-second Wingate test of anaerobic power, may be more sensitive to motivational and learning changes in novice, healthy subjects.

PURPOSE: To examine performance changes during serial Wingate tests in healthy college-age students.

METHODS: Twenty college students were recruited to do three 30-second Wingate tests over three days. They were given identical instructions before each test. Sleep and nutrition were controlled. Standard Wingate parameters were collected. Multivariate analysis was used to examine changes in performance parameters; data are highlighted for the singular variable: peak power.

RESULTS: Eighteen subjects completed all three tests. The overall multivariate analysis for test number was not significant, and there were no significant differences across test days for peak power, power decline, average power, minimum power, power at max speed, or total energy expended. For peak power; averages for test 1 (1.72 ± 0.31 W/kg), test 2 (1.74 ± 0.28 W/kg), and test 3 (1.79 ± 0.32 W/kg) were similar, but examination of percent changes in performances illustrates why results appear homogenous. Thirteen of the subjects improved their performance with repeated trials. The average improvement in peak power for those subjects was 9.8 ± 5.2%. Five subjects had performance declines from the first trial of 4.9 ± 3.9%. One subject had no change in performance.

CONCLUSION: The fluctuation from zero to as high as 22% illustrates high variability of these power measurements (power decline ranged as much as 97% within one subject). This degree of variability is well outside what would normally be expected for biological variation and could be construed as problems with equipment calibration. Without application of criteria for subject effort, such as applied to cardiopulmonary exercise testing, it is difficult to make objective intra- group or intra-subject comparisons for Wingate testing.

Share

COinS