Reproducibility of an aerobic endurance test for nonexpert swimmers

Abstract

Background:This study aimed to verify the reproduction of an aerobic test to determine nonexpert swimmers’ resistance.Methods:The sample consisted of 24 male swimmers (age: 22.79 ± 3.90 years; weight: 74.72 ± 11.44 kg; height: 172.58 ± 4.99 cm; and fat percentage: 15.19% ± 3.21%), who swim for 1 hour three times a week. A new instrument was used in this study (a Progressive Swim Test): the swimmer wore an underwater MP3 player and increased their swimming speed on hearing a beep after every 25 meters. Each swimmer’s heart rate was recorded before the test (BHR) and again after the test (AHR). The rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and the number of laps performed (NLP) were also recorded. The sample size was estimated using G*Power software (v 3.0.10; Franz Faul, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany). The descriptive values were expressed as mean and standard deviation. After confirming the normality of the data using both the Shapiro–Wilk and Levene tests, a paired t-test was performed to compare the data. The Pearson’s linear correlation (r) and intraclass coefficient correlation (ICC) tests were used to determine relative reproducibility. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the coefficient of variation (CV) were used to determine absolute reproducibility. The limits of agreement and the bias of the absolute and relative values between days were determined by Bland–Altman plots. All values had a significance level of P < 0.05.Results:There were significant differences in AHR (P = 0.03) and NLP (P = 0.01) between the 2 days of testing. The obtained values were r > 0.50 and ICC > 0.66. The SEM had a variation of ±2% and the CV was <10%. Most cases were within the upper and lower limits of Bland–Altman plots, suggesting correlation of the results. The applicability of NLP showed greater robustness (r and ICC > 0.90; SEM < 1%; CV < 3%), indicating that the other variables can be used to predict incremental changes in the physiological condition of swimmers.Conclusion:The Progressive Swim Test for nonexpert swimmers produces comparable results for noncompetitive swimmers with a favorable degree of reproducibility, thus presenting possible applications for researching the physiological performance of nonexpert swimmers.

Validation of an equation for estimating maximal oxygen consumption of nonexpert adult swimmers

“…In this sense, the relative VO 2 enabled the creation of three models using BM, NLP, and AHR. These variables were selected because they are the determinants of the physiological conditions of the swimmers in the test 19,34…”

“…Studies have shown that VO 2 max in a swimming test is obtained above the 4 minutes to meet the criteria for verification of VO 2 max (an increase of 45 mL/kg/min; rate of perceived exertion of seven, classified as “very hard;” 90% maximal heart rate) 6,27. The protocol of Veronese da Costa et al was adapted to extend the time of exercise and verification of all the criteria for reaching VO 2 max 6,19,20,26. Accordingly, the adaptation has doubled the maximum distance from 400 to 800 m, with the goal of increasing the intensity of the test with the reduction of 1 second for every two laps completed.…”

“…The test used for the validation of the equation for estimating VO 2 max was the Progressive Swim Test proposed by Veronese da Costa et al 19 This protocol corresponds to a progressive series of front crawl in a 25 m pool and includes the use of a recording of beeps that enable the swimmer to keep the correct swimming rhythm; there is a decrease of the partial times of 1 second for each lap completed (number of laps performed [NLP]). The test ends when the swimmer twice followed fails to be within 5 meters that precede the edge of the pool.…”

“…In this case, the tests that are fit to be applied in nonexpert swimmers are those that enable the intensity of swimming to be controlled. It is believed that the progressive tests would be ideal for assessing the VO 2 max due to controlling the rate of stroke without intervals, which would gradually increase the intensity and duration through sounds and signals, mainly because these swimmers do not have the expertise to properly control their rhythm during swimming, as do elite swimmers 19,20. It is also worth mentioning that the execution time of swimming at a speed that matches the maximal oxygen uptake for nonexpert swimmers is between 310 and 325 seconds,21,22 which requires attention to the duration of test execution for these swimmers.…”

“…23 , 24 In this regard, the intensity of the activities proposed in swimming lessons needs further discussion, especially when it comes to people who practice regular noncompetitive physical activity, since the number of studies that evaluate the performance in elite swimming athletes is greater than those for nonexpert swimmers, and it seems that there is no equation for determining the level of VO 2 max for swimmers of this level. 19 , 23 , 24 …”