The perception of exertion during load carriage

Goslin, Brian R.; Rorke, S. C.

doi:10.1080/00140138608968302

Cited by 31 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The empirical and correlational evidence demonstrating a relationship between ratings of perceived exertion and relative oxygen uptake is no more consistent (e.g. Goslin and Rorke, 1986;Pivarnik and Senay, 1986;Toner et al, 1986;Demello et al, 1987) than that between ratings of perceived exertion and each of the other two physiological measures discussed above. Despite this, maximal oxygen uptake has generally been shown to be one of the most valid measures of physical ® tness (Siconol® et al, 1985;Liu et al, 1992;Murray et al, 1993;Brown et al, 1996a,b), and heart rate has been shown to be highly correlated with %V .…”

Section: The Relationship Between Ratings Of Perceived Exertion and Pmentioning

confidence: 90%

Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived exertion scale in healthy individuals: a meta-analysis

Chen

Fan²,

Moe³

2002

Journal of Sports Sciences

599

368

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature related to Borg's ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) scale has revealed inconsistencies about the strength of the relationship between ratings of perceived exertion and various physiological criterion measures, such as heart rate, blood lactate concentration, percent maximal oxygen uptake (%VO2max), oxygen uptake (VO2), ventilation and respiration rate. Using sex of participants, fitness, type of RPE scale used, type of exercise, exercise protocol, RPE mode and study quality, we undertook a meta-analysis to determine the strength of the relationship between RPE scores and the six aforementioned physiological measures. The weighted mean validity coefficients were 0.62 for heart rate, 0.57 for blood lactate, 0.64 for %VO2max 0.63 for VO2, 0.61 for ventilation and 0.72 for respiration rate. Analysis of moderator variables revealed that the following study features could account for the variation of results across studies: heart rate--fitness, type of exercise, protocol and RPE mode; blood lactate concentration--sex, RPE scale; VO2--sex, exercise type, RPE mode; ventilation--sex, RPE mode; respiration rate--exercise protocol, RPE mode. The highest correlations between ratings of perceived exertion and the various physiological criterion measures were found in the following conditions: when male participants (whose VO2 or ventilation was measured) were required to maximally exert themselves (measuring %VO2max or ventilation); when the exercise task was unusual [e.g. when participants were swimming, which is less common than walking or running (when heart rate, %VO2max and VO2 are measured)]; or when the 15-point RPE scale (measuring blood lactate concentration) was used. These findings suggest that although Borg's RPE scale has been shown to be a valid measure of exercise intensity, its validity may not be as high as previously thought (r = 0.80-0.90), except under certain conditions.

show abstract

Section: The Relationship Between Ratings Of Perceived Exertion and Pmentioning

confidence: 90%

Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived exertion scale in healthy individuals: a meta-analysis

Chen

Fan²,

Moe³

2002

Journal of Sports Sciences

599

368

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Quesada et al stated that 0 and 15% body weight load produced similar results of perceived exertion but subjects perceived the work to be harder during carrying 30% bodyweight [44]. Goslin and Rorke also reported that there is a linear relationship between perceived exertion and increase in the amount of load [14]. Johnson et al assessed discomfort when soldiers carried 34, 48 or 61 kg loads in a backpack and double pack.…”

Section: What Is the Relationship Between Backpack Usementioning

confidence: 93%

Can load carriage system weight, design and placement affect pain and discomfort? A systematic review

Golriz

Walker

2011

BMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Purpose: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to answer the following questions: 1. Does usage or weight of load carriage system cause pain, perceived exertion or discomfort? 2. Can load carriage system placement on the spine influence pain, perceived exertion or discomfort? 3. Can load carriage system design influence the amount of pain, perceived exertion or discomfort caused by their use? Method: Eight databases were searched. Each included study was analysed and quality appraised by two independent reviewers. Results: Forty-seven articles that addressed the research questions were included in the study. Significant variability in the study design and populations of the studies prevented data pooling and the evidence is conflicting. However, qualitative synthesis of the studies shows that carrying loads may provoke low back pain; and it may also trigger neck, thoracic and shoulder pain. Backpack weight can influence perceived pain, however other factors are involved. Discussion: There is conflicting but positive evidence on the correlation between backpack load carrying and experiencing pain during different stages of life. The research to date is lacking with the most commonly identified methodological deficiencies being poor overall design, the lack of justification of sample size, providing training sessions for examiners, and not utilising calibrated, valid and reliable instruments for measurement.

show abstract

“…The RPE is a 15-category scale, ranging from 6 to 20, used to rate perceived exertion from no exertion at all (i.e., rest) to maximum exertion. When administered in studies of load carriage, the ratings appear to reflect feelings of increased muscle tension and sensations from skin, tendons, and ligaments rather than a more generalized level of exertion [26]. To account for this, a discomfort questionnaire was completed at the end of each walking test in this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metabolic analysis of male servicemembers with transtibial amputations carrying military loads

Schnall

Wolf²,

Bell³

et al. 2012

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-For servicemembers who have sustained amputations and wish to return to Active Duty, performing common military tasks is essential. The purpose of this study was to examine the metabolic requirements of servicemembers with transtibial amputations wearing a loaded rucksack and walking at a steady speed. We tested 12 servicemembers with unilateral transtibial amputations and 12 uninjured controls on a treadmill at two walking speeds (1.34 and 1.52 m/s) while they carried a 32.7 kg load. Oxygen consumption was recorded. Results showed that metabolic demand for the injured servicemembers was significantly higher (8.5% at 1.34 m/s and 10.4% at 1.52 m/s) than for controls. An understanding of energy expended during load carriage by this study population is critical for decisions regarding return-to-duty requirements. Although significant differences existed between uninjured controls and those with amputations, it is important to note that those differences are less than previously published. This finding, coupled with the fact that servicemembers with transtibial amputations have redeployed, implies that, despite statistical significance, results may not be clinically relevant. Future work should include more taxing conditions to identify a threshold for potential limitations.

show abstract

The perception of exertion during load carriage

Cited by 31 publications

References 18 publications

Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived exertion scale in healthy individuals: a meta-analysis

Criterion-related validity of the Borg ratings of perceived exertion scale in healthy individuals: a meta-analysis

Can load carriage system weight, design and placement affect pain and discomfort? A systematic review

Metabolic analysis of male servicemembers with transtibial amputations carrying military loads

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About