Background To validate the traditional talk test (TTT) and an alternative talk test (ATT; using a visual analog scale) in overweight/obese (OW-OB) patients and to establish its accuracy in determining the aerobic training zones. Methods We recruited 19 subjects aged 34.9 ± 6.7 years, diagnosed with overweight/obesity (BMI 31.8 ± 5.7). Every subject underwent incremental cycloergometric tests for maximal oxygen consumption, and TTT in a randomized order. At the end of each stage during the TTT, each subject read out loud a 40 words text and then had to identify the comfort to talk in two modalities: TTT which consisted in answering “Yes,” “I don’t know,” or “No” to the question Was talking comfortable?, or ATT through a 1 to 10 numeric perception scale (visual analog scale (VAS)). The magnitude of differences was interpreted in comparison to the smallest worthwhile change and was used to determine agreement. Results There was an agreement between the power output at the VAS 2–3 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) (very likely equivalent; mean difference − 1.3 W, 90% confidence limit (CL) (− 8.2; 5.6), percent chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.7/99.1/0.2%). Also, there was an agreement between the power output at the VAS 6–7 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 2 (VT2) (very likely equivalent; mean difference 11.1 W, 90% CL (2.8; 19.2), percent chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.0/97.6/2.4%). Conclusions ATT is a tool to determine exercise intensity and to establish aerobic training zones for exercise prescription in OW-OB patients.

Background: to validate the traditional talk test (TTT) and an alternative talk test (ATT; using a visual analog scale) in overweight/obese (OW-OB) patients and to establish its accuracy in determining the aerobic training zones.Methods: We recruited 19 subjects aged 34.9 ± 6.7 years, diagnosed with overweight/obesity (BMI 31.8 ± 5.7). Every subject underwent incremental cycloergometric tests for maximal oxygen consumption, and TT in a randomized order. At the end of each stage during the TT each subject read out loud a 40 words text and then had to identify the comfort to talk in two modalities: TTT which consisted in answering “Yes”, “I don’t know” or “No” to the question Was talking comfortable?, or ATT through a 1 to 10 numeric perception scale (visual scale analog: VAS). The magnitude of differences was interpreted in comparison to the smallest worthwhile change (SWC) and was used to determine agreement.Results: Agreement between the power output at the VAS 2-3 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 1 (very likely equivalent; mean difference -1.3 W, 90 % CL (-8.2; 5.6), % chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.7/99.1/0.2 %). Also, there was an agreement between the power output at the VAS 6-7 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 2 (very likely equivalent; mean difference 11.1 W, 90 % CL (2.8; 19.2), % chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.0/97.6/2.4 %). Conclusions: ATT is a tool to determine exercise intensity and to establish aerobic training zones for exercise prescription in OW-OB patients.

Background: to validate the traditional talk test (TTT) and an alternative talk test (ATT; using a visual analog scale) in overweight/obese (OW-OB) patients and to establish its accuracy in determining the aerobic training zones.Methods: We recruited 19 subjects aged 34.9 ± 6.7 years, diagnosed with overweight/obesity (BMI 31.8 ± 5.7). Every subject underwent incremental cycloergometric tests for maximal oxygen consumption, and TTT in a randomized order. At the end of each stage during the TTT each subject read out loud a 40 words text and then had to identify the comfort to talk in two modalities: TTT which consisted in answering “Yes”, “I don’t know” or “No” to the question Was talking comfortable?, or ATT through a 1 to 10 numeric perception scale (visual scale analog: VAS). The magnitude of differences was interpreted in comparison to the smallest worthwhile change and was used to determine agreement.Results: Agreement between the power output at the VAS 2-3 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) (very likely equivalent; mean difference -1.3 Watts (W), 90 % confidence limit (CL) (-8.2; 5.6), % chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.7/99.1/0.2 %). Also, there was an agreement between the power output at the VAS 6-7 of ATT and the power output at the ventilatory threshold 2 (VT2) (very likely equivalent; mean difference 11.1 W, 90 % CL (2.8; 19.2), % chances for higher/similar/lower values of 0.0/97.6/2.4 %). Conclusions: ATT is a tool to determine exercise intensity and to establish aerobic training zones for exercise prescription in OW-OB patients.