Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2014; 35(05): 379-384
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1353166
Training & Testing
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

A Learning Protocol Improves the Validity of the Borg 6–20 RPE Scale During Indoor Cycling

A. Soriano-Maldonado   *
1   Department of Medical Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain
2   Department of Physical Education and Sport, School of Sports Sciences, University of Granada, Spain
,
L. Romero   *
1   Department of Medical Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain
,
P. Femia
3   Department of Statistics and Operative Research, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain
,
C. Roero
1   Department of Medical Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain
,
J. R. Ruiz
2   Department of Physical Education and Sport, School of Sports Sciences, University of Granada, Spain
4   Department of Biosciences and Nutrition, Unit for Preventive Nutrition, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden
,
A. Gutierrez
1   Department of Medical Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted after revision 10 July 2013

Publication Date:
28 October 2013 (online)

Also available at
   Buy Article Permissions and Reprints
Zoom Image

Abstract

The present study assessed the effectiveness of an RPE learning protocol for improving the validity of the Borg 6–20 RPE scale for self-regulating exercise intensity during Indoor Cycling (IC). 16 healthy adults performed 5 IC sessions. Heart rate (HR) was continuously monitored. In sessions 1 and 5, participants perceptually regulated exercise intensity to produce pre-determined RPE levels equivalent to estimated HR levels. Sessions 2, 3 and 4 focused on the RPE learning protocol. The RPE-measured HR correlation was 0.59 in session 1 and 0.67 in session 5 (both P<0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient between measured HR and estimated HR was 0.85 in session 1 and 0.90 in session 5. There was bias in session 1 (3.69 bpm [SD=12.44]; P<0.001) but not in session 5 (0.99 bpm [SD=9.7]; P=0.178; mean HR difference session 5 vs. 1: −2.70 bpm [95% CI: −4.49 to −0.91]; P=0.003; Cohen’s d=0.24). There was association between the HR difference and the magnitude of the measurement in session 1 (β=0.208; P<0.01) but not in session 5 (β=−0.072; P=0.34). These preliminary results suggested that an RPE learning protocol might slightly improve the validity of the Borg 6–20 RPE scale for exercise intensity self-regulation during IC sessions in healthy adults.

Key words

spinning - exercise prescription - rating of perceived exertion - heart rate - production RPE paradigm - agreement between measurement methods

* A. Soriano-Maldonado and L. Romero contributed equally.