Convergent Validity of Ratings of Perceived Exertion During Resistance Exercise in Healthy Participants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background The validity of ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during aerobic training is well established; however, its validity during resistance exercise is less clear. This meta-analysis used the known relationships between RPE and exercise intensity (EI), heart rate (HR), blood lactate (BLa), blood pressure (BP) and electromyography (EMG) to determine the convergent validity of RPE as a measure of resistance exercise intensity and physiological exertion, during different forms of resistance exercise. Additionally, this study aims to assess the effect of several moderator variables on the strength of the validity coefficients, so that clearer guidance can be given on the use of RPE during resistance exercise. Methods An online search of 4 databases and websites (PubMed, Web of Science SPORTDiscus and ResearchGate) was conducted up to 28 February 2020. Additionally, the reference lists of the included articles were inspected manually for further unidentified studies. The inclusion criteria were healthy participants of any age, a rating scale used to measure RPE, resistance exercise of any type, one cohort receiving no other intervention, and must present data from one of the following outcome measures: EI, HR, BP, EMG or BLa. Weighted mean effect sizes (r) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the τ2 and I2 statistics. Moderator analysis was conducted using random-effects meta-regression. Results One-hundred and eighteen studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 75 studies (99 unique cohorts) included in the meta-analysis. The overall weighted mean validity coefficient was large (0.88; 95% CI 0.84–0.91) and between studies heterogeneity was very large (τ2 = 0.526, I2 = 96.1%). Studies using greater workload ranges, isometric muscle actions, and those that manipulated workload or repetition time, showed the highest validity coefficients. Conversely, sex, age, training status, RPE scale used, and outcome measure no significant effect. Conclusions RPE provides a valid measure of exercise intensity and physiological exertion during resistance exercise, with effect sizes comparable to or greater than those shown during aerobic exercise. Therefore, RPE may provide an easily accessible means of prescribing and monitoring resistance exercise training. Trial Registration The systematic review protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42018102640).

The WATER study: Which AquaTic ExeRcises increase muscle activity and limit pain for people with low back pain?

“…Exercise intensity [HR in beats per minute (bpm); Polar Monitor, Kempele, Finland], rate of perceived exertion (RPE, Borg's 6-20 scale) and pain (visual analogue scale, 0-10) were recorded at the end of each exercise. The methods that were used to assess the outcome measures in the present study have been shown to have high validity and reliability [32][33][34][35].…”

Tailored exercise and manual therapy versus standardised exercise for patients with shoulder subacromial pain: a feasibility randomised controlled trial (the Otago MASTER trial)

“…The intensity of strengthening exercises was monitored using a modified Borg Scale 28. The Borg Scale is valid tool for measuring exertion during resistance training 29 30…”

Criteria-Based Rehabilitation Following Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Clinical Commentary

“…In a recent meta-analysis by Lea et.al, rate of perceived exertion (RPE) has been shown to be a valid measure of exercise intensity and exertion. 60 As such, utilizing RPE can be monitored to ensure sufficient load is being applied. Considering this information, a 60-80% intensity of 1RM can be estimated at about 6-8/10 or 14-17/20 using an RPE scale.…”