The Sensitivity of Differential Ratings of Perceived Exertion as Measures of Internal Load

Abstract

and leg exertion (RPE-L) immediately upon exercise termination (RPE-B0, RPE-L0) and 30-minutes post-exercise (RPE-B30, RPE-L30). Data were analysed using magnitude-based inferences. Results: There were clear between-protocol differences for V O2max (Cycle 46.5 ± 6.3 vs Treadmill 51.0 ± 5.1 ml·kg -1 ·min -1 , mean difference -9.2%; ±90% confidence limits 3.7%), HRmax (185 ± 13 vs 197 ± 8 b·min -1 , -6.0%; ±1.7%), B[La]peak (9.7 ± 2.1 vs 8.5 ± 2.0 mmol·L -1 , 15%; ±10%) and ΔCMJH (-7.1 ± 4.2 vs 0.6 ± 3.6 cm, -23.2%; ±5.4%). Clear between-protocol differences were recorded for RPE-B0 (78 ± 12 vs 94.7 ± 9.5 AU, -18.1%; ±4.5%), RPE-L0 (92.6 ± 9.7 vs 81 ± 14 AU, 15.3%; ±7.6%), RPE-B30 (70 ± 11 vs 82 ± 13 AU, -13.8%; ±7.3%) and RPE-L30 (86 ± 12 vs 65 ± 19 AU, 37%; ±17%). A substantial timing effect was observed for dRPE, with moderate to large reductions in all scores 30-minutes post-exercise when compared to scores collected upon exercise termination.Conclusion: dRPE enhance the precision of internal load measurement and therefore represent a worthwhile addition to training load monitoring procedures.

Patients Awaiting Surgical Repair for Large Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Can Exercise at Moderate to Hard Intensities with a Low Risk of Adverse Events

“…Consistent with previous studies, we found peripheral ratings of exertion to be higher than central ratings (Pandolf et al, 1975; Green et al, 2009; Borg et al, 2010; McLaren et al, 2016). The magnitude of the difference in the two perceptual responses was small, which is consistent with recent reports in athletic populations (McLaren et al, 2016). This finding helps to explain the lower compliance for RPE-C as our high-intensity criterion was the same for both measures of RPE.…”

Revised Approach to the Role of Fatigue in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Prevention: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

“…An example would be to ask athletes to be specific about how much their ‘legs’ were affected, i.e., rate of perceived leg-muscle exertion (RPE-L) [23, 28]. This differentiation in physiological and biomechanical internal load enables monitoring of both central [breathlessness (RPE-B), e.g., uptake and transport of oxygen, central nervous system] and peripheral (RPE-L, e.g., neuromuscular, musculoskeletal, and muscle metabolite characteristics) exertion in team sport athletes [85]. …”

Maximal heart rate assessment in recreational football players: A study involving a multiple testing approach

“…In order to ensure data consistency, exercise HR was recorded using the same HR monitors across the tests and playing conditions. To evaluate player's general and differential fatigue (ie, central and peripheral), the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) as global (RPE G ), cardiorespiratory (RPE CR ), and muscular (RPE M ) scores was assessed after the Match and maximal tests, using the CR10 Börg scale …”

“…To evaluate player's general and differential fatigue (ie, central and peripheral), the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) as global (RPE G ), cardiorespiratory (RPE CR ), and muscular (RPE M ) scores was assessed after the Match and maximal tests, using the CR10 Börg scale. 18 The HR max was assumed as the highest value obtained across these testing protocols and settings. For each testing procedure, players' HR max achievement was reported as the absolute and relative number of players reaching their individual HR max (ie, frequency of attainment of HR max ).…”