Determination of VO
2
-Intensity Relationship and
MAOD in Tethered Swimming
Authors C. A. Kalva-Filho1, M. Y. C. Araújo2, A. Silva3, C. A. Gobatto4, A. M. Zagatto5, R. B. Gobbi6, M. Papoti7 Affiliations Affiliation addresses are listed at the end of the article
Introduction
▼
Despite criticism [2], the maximum accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) appears to be a valid [17] and reproducible parameter [19, 34] for estimat-ing anaerobic capacity [19]. As the most accepted protocol to estimate anaerobic capacity, MAOD is often used to validate other methods that are proposed to measure this physical capacity [4, 16, 35, 36]. To calculate MAOD, the oxygen demand of an exhaustive effort is estimated by the relationship between oxygen uptake and sev-eral submaximal intensities (VO2-intensity
rela-tionship) [17].
In swimming, anaerobic capacity may be meas-ured by using a swimming flume [21, 22, 33] or a conventional swimming pool [28, 29], which require using a snorkel and valve system to deter-mine oxygen uptake (VO2) during effort [14].
However, these protocols for anaerobic capacity determination increase the cost of the measure-ments and can influence swimming technique, primarily by the absence of turns and the respi-ration phase [3, 13]. Together, these swimming flume or snorkel and valve system-related facts
cause difficulty for MAOD measurement during a training routine. Some studies have shown the effects of swimming training on MAOD values [21, 33] and the influence of different experi-mental approaches on this parameter of anaero-bic capacity in swimmers (i. e., the effect of hand paddles) [22]; however, the reproducibility of MAOD in an aquatic environment remains unclear.
Although previous studies have observed some alterations in swimming mechanics [9], tethered swimming efforts may be used to determine VO2
in swimmers [26, 27]. In addition, the cardiovas-cular stress (i. e., cardiac output) appears to be reproducible in tethered swimming [11], and the VO2 peak (VO2PEAK) values are similar to those
determined in freestyle swimming [5]. Thus, tethered swimming may be used as an alterna-tive method for the determination of MAOD because it presents the advantage of reduced cost compared with a swimming flume. Although previous studies have calculated the oxygen demand in tethered swimming [26], the repro-ducibility of the VO2-intensity relationship
should also be investigated. accepted after revision
July 25, 2015 Bibliography DOI http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1055/s-0035-1559696 Published online: May 13, 2016
Int J Sports Med 2016; 37: 687–693 © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York ISSN 0172-4622
Correspondence
Prof. Carlos Augusto Kalva-Filho
Rehabilitation and Functional Performance
University of São Paulo Av. Bandeirantes 3900-Monte Alegre Ribeirão Preto Brazil Tel.: + 55/42/91041 391 Fax: + 55/16/3602 4585 kalvafilho@yahoo.com.br Key words ●▶ anaerobic capacity ●▶ reproducibility ●▶ swimmers
Abstract
▼
This study aimed to test the reproducibility of the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) values and VO2-intensity relationship
parame-ters as measured during tethered swimming. 9 swimmers performed an incremental test to determine the maximal aerobic force (MAF), 6 submaximal efforts to develop VO2-intensity
relationship, and an exhaustive effort to deter-mine MAOD. The tests were performed twice. The reproducibility of the measurements was tested using intraclass correlation (ICC), typical error (TE) and coefficient of variation (CV). High levels of reproducibility were observed for MAF
(TE = 2.6 N; CV = 4.3 %; ICC = 0.98) and VO2
-inten-sity relationship parameters, as intercept (TE = 0.01 L.min − 1; CV = 11.4 %; ICC = 0.97), slope
(TE = 0.002 L.min − 1.N − 1; CV = 3.1 %; ICC = 0.97) and
coefficient of determination (TE = 0.02; CV = 1.8 %; ICC = 0.47). The MAOD values measured during the test (2.9 ± 1.1 L and 45.3 ± 14.0 mL.Kg − 1) and
retests (2.9 ± 1.1 L and 45.2 ± 12.6 mL.Kg − 1) were
highly correlated (absolute values: ICC = 0.93; relative to body mass values: ICC = 0.89) and pre-sented low values of TE (0.3 L and 4.3 mL.Kg − 1)
and CV (9.5 % for absolute and 9.6 % for relative to body mass values). Thus, we demonstrated the potential use of tethered swimming to assess anaerobic capacity in an aquatic environment.
Thus, the primary aim of the present study was to investigate the reproducibility of the MAOD values and VO2-intensity
rela-tionship parameters in tethered swimming. Based on the repro-ducibility of the cardiorespiratory parameters [11] measured in tethered swimming and on the reproducibility of the MAOD val-ues and the VO2-intensity relationship with a cycle ergometer
[34], we hypothesized that the parameters measured using teth-ered swimming conditions would be reproducible.
Methods
▼
Participants
The sample size was calculated based on the assumption that the reliability of MAOD presented a significant and strong cor-relation with coefficients higher than 0.95 [34]. We used the G * Power 3.1 software (Düsseldorf, Germany) to determine the minimum sample size required to provide a statistical power of 90 % with an alpha of 0.05 for the analysis. Thus, 9 swimmers (age: 18 ± 2 years; height: 167.6 ± 10.1 cm; body mass: 62.3 ± 8.7 kg; body fat: 21.5 ± 11.7 %), including 4 males (age: 19 ± 1 years; height: 176.2 ± 6.9 cm; body mass: 69.6 ± 6.7 kg; body fat: 11.2 ± 5.5 %) and 5 females (age: 18 ± 2 years; height: 161.2 ± 5.2 cm; body mass: 55.1 ± 5.2 kg; body fat: 28.3 ± 7.1 %), voluntarily participated in the current study. The participants had specialized in medium/long (22.2 %) or short (77.8 %) dis-tance swimming in regional and national level competitions for at least 5 years. The swimmers used tethered swimming efforts during the competitive phase of training. The procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects of the University (Human Research Ethics Committee). Athletes and their parents were informed about the experimental proce-dures and provided a written informed consent form authorizing the swimmers’ participation in the study. This study was per-formed in accordance with the ethical standards of the IJSM [10].
Experimental design
Participants performed 12 swimming sessions with at least 24 h of recovery between each session. Evaluations were performed during the test and retest conditions in the following order: 1) graded exercise test in tethered swimming to determine the maximal aerobic force (i. e., higher force achieved during the test; MAF); 2) 6 submaximal efforts performed in random order
with a maximum of 2 efforts per day, with intensities ranging from 50 to 95 % of MAF; and 3) maximal effort at 100 % of MAF. Thus, at the end of the experimental design (i. e., test and retest conditions), 2 values of MAF, 12 submaximal efforts and 2 maxi-mal efforts were obtained ( ●▶ Fig. 1).
All efforts were performed after a standardized warm-up (~1 000 m) in a 25-m swimming pool at 28 ± 1 °C. To reduce the learning effects, one week before the beginning of the study, the swimmers performed 4 sessions of familiarization in tethered swimming (i. e., 10–20 min in intensities ranging from moderate to maximal, as determined subjectively). The graded exercise test started 24 h after the last adaptation session. All sessions were performed in the crawl style and at the beginning of the periodization (i. e., endurance phase), in which most training sessions are performed with intensities below or at the anaero-bic threshold. Thus, no significant differences arose between sprinters and medium/long distance swimmers. Only the MAF values were analyzed during the experimental approach, which allowed for the prescription of submaximal and maximal efforts. Thus, all of the analyses required to build the VO2-intensity
rela-tionship and determine MAOD were performed after all of the data were collected. This approach was chosen to avoid possible trends in data analysis performed by different researchers.
Instrumentation
The force and VO2 were continuously monitored during all
efforts. The force was measured using a dynamometer (HOMIS 2100, São Paulo, Brazil) equipped with a load cell (100 kg-capac-ity primary weighing sensor). The load cell was attached to the starting block, and the athletes were connected to it using a 6-meter-long elastic cord (Auriflex, n ° 204, São Paulo, Brazil). Data from the load cell were registered every 2 s and recorded using specific software (Lutron SW-U801, Taipei, Taiwan). This system was previously calibrated with the superposition of known weights (e. g., 500 g of variation between each weight). For this, the dynamometer was fixed, and each known weight was suspended for at least 30 s, which allowed for the determi-nation of force display values. Thus, a linear function was built with known weights and force display values, which resulted in a perfectly correlated relationship (r2 = 1). Although the real
val-ues of force can be altered using an elastic cord, the high linear-ity of the dynamometer system indicates that the error in force was similar for all efforts (i. e., systematic error). Moreover, real-Day 1 Test condition Retest condition Day 7 2th MAF
1th MAF 1th MaximalEffort
2th Maximal efforts Six submaximal efforts (1th–6th) Evaluations performed Evaluations
performed efforts (7th–12th)Six submaximal
Day 6
Day 12 Days 2–5
Days 8–11
Fig. 1 Experimental design performed in test and
retest conditions. MAF: maximal aerobic force.
time adjustments for the swimmers’ positions were performed for maintenance of prescribed force, decreasing the possible influ-ence of variation on tension produced by using elastic cords. The same elastic cord was used in both the test and retest conditions. For the determination of VO2, the mask of a gas analyzer
(VO2000, Medgraphics, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA) was replaced with a snorkel [25, 27]. The equipment was calibrated according to the manufacturer’s specifications before the beginning of each test, and the VO2 values were obtained for cycles of 3
breaths each. This type of gas analyzer was previously used to determine physiological variables in tethered swimming [25, 27] and MAOD [16, 36].
Tethered-swimming graded-exercise test
The incremental test was performed until volitional exhaustion or when the swimmers were unable to sustain a predetermined force for at least 10 s. The initial intensity of the incremental test was 20 N, with increments of 10 N every 3 min. The intensities and increments were applied using tags on the pool floor as pre-viously published [25]. The force for each stage was represented by the average values observed at the last minute of the effort. The MAF was used to determine individual submaximal intensi-ties. When the athlete became exhausted before the end of the stage, the MAF was adjusted by Kuipers et al. [15] equation and adapted for tethered swimming [25]. The incremental test was repeated on 2 different days to test the reproducibility of MAF values.
Submaximal and maximal efforts
6 submaximal efforts were performed in random order to deter-mine the VO2-intensity relationship. The efforts lasted 7 min and
included intensities ranging from 50 to 90 % of MAF. At most, 2 submaximal efforts were performed during each day session, with an interval of at least 15 min between them. This passive
interval allowed the VO2 to return to baseline values (i. e., values
observed 2 min before the tests). The real intensity of each sub-maximal effort was the mean force values observed during the last 30 s of the effort. The mean values of VO2 observed during
the last 30 s of the effort were considered to be the steady state of VO2 for the corresponding intensity.
In addition, the athletes were submitted to an effort with inten-sity corresponding to 100 % of MAF until volitional exhaustion to determine the time to exhaustion (Tlim) and accumulated VO2.
This intensity was selected because it allowed the consistency of the swimmer for more than 2 min [25] and did not influence the MAOD values [18]. The VO2 observed in the last 30 s of this
max-imum effort was considered the peak value of VO2 (VO2PEAK) for
this intensity. After 48 h, the submaximal and maximal efforts were repeated to test their reproducibility.
MAOD determination
Before the beginning of the previously described maximal effort, swimmers remained at rest for 10 min for the baseline oxygen uptake determination (i. e., mean of the last 2 min; VO2BAS).
Dur-ing the maximum effort performed at 100 % of MAF, swimmers were instructed to keep their head aligned to the tags located at the bottom of the pool as long as possible; however, the devel-oped force presented some variation. Therefore, the area of theo-retical O2 demand cannot be considered rectangular (i. e.,
demand for maximum intensity × Tlim), as occurs on a cycle ergometer or treadmill.
Thus, the force and the VO2 observed during the maximal effort
were interpolated to obtain the values of every second of the test (OriginPro 6.0, Microcal, MA, USA). Open symbols in ●▶ Fig. 2
rep-resent the O2 demand for each force value observed in every
sec-ond of maximum effort. O2 demand was obtained by the
extrapolation of the VO2-intensity relationship. Therefore, the
MAOD values were determined by the difference between the 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Time (min) VO 2 (L.min –1) MAOD Accumulated VO2 1.5 O2 Demand VO2
Fig. 2 O2 demands for the force values observed in every second of each test determined by ex-trapolation of the VO2-intensity relationship (open symbols) and the VO2 measured during the maxi-mum effort (closed symbols). MAOD: maximaxi-mum accumulated oxygen deficit.
integral of the O2 demand for each value of force and the
accu-mulated VO2 (i. e., integral of the VO2 observed during the test;
represented by closed symbols in ●▶ Fig. 2). The MAOD values
were expressed in absolute (L) and relative to body mass values (mL.Kg − 1).
Statistical analysis
The normality of the data was tested and confirmed by the Sha-piro-Wilk’s test, which allowed for the use of parametric statis-tics. The results are presented as the means and standard deviation (mean ± SD). The reproducibility of the studied varia-bles was measured using Student’s t-test for dependent samples together with the determinations of the effect size (ES), typical error (TE), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). TE and CV were calculated [12]. ES was classi-fied as negligible (< 0.35), small (0.35–0.80), moderate (0.80– 1.5) and large (> 1.5) [30]. All analyses were conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Science software, version 17.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA), and the significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.
Results
▼
The duration of the incremental tests performed to determine MAF ranged from 8.48 min and 24.00 min in both the test (14.8 ± 1.9 min) and retest conditions (15.2 ± 2.0 min) (p-value = 0.34; ES = 0.06 [negligible]), presenting high levels of reproducibility (TE = 0.8 min; CV = 5.1 % and ICC = 0.98). ●▶ Fig. 3 demonstrates the
mean VO2 corresponding to 6 submaximal efforts observed in
both conditions. No significant differences were observed for VO2 (0.12 < p-value < 0.97; ES = 0.02–0.28 [negligible to small])
and force (0.14 < p-value < 0.39; ES = 0.04–0.10 [negligible to small]) between the test and retest. MAF and the linear
regres-sion parameters used to determine the VO2-intensity
relation-ship were not different (0.09 < p-value < 0.94; ES = 0.06–0.18 [negligible to moderate]) and showed very low values of TE and CV between test and retest ( ●▶ Table 1). In addition, MAF and the
linear regression parameters presented significant correlations between the test and retest ( ●▶ Table 1). The lower coefficients of
determination observed during test and retest were 0.91 and 0.93, respectively.
●▶ Table 2 shows the variables observed during the maximal
effort performed at 100 % of the MAF during the test and retest. No significant differences between these conditions (0.18 < p-value < 0.80; ES = 0.09–0.41 [negligible to small]) were observed for the analyzed variables. However, the TE and CV val-ues and the lack of significant correlations demonstrate a con-siderable individual variation between the test and retest conditions ( ●▶ Table 2). The minimal and maximal values for Tlim
in both conditions were 151 s and 356 s, respectively. No differ-ence was observed for MAOD values between the test and retest (p-value > 0.87; ES < 0.02 [negligible]). In addition, low values of TE and CV were accompanied by very strong correlations, which demonstrated the similarity of MAOD values during both test and retest ( ●▶ Table 2).
Discussion
▼
Confirming the initial hypothesis, the main finding of the present study demonstrates that tethered swimming can be used to meas-ure VO2-intensity relationship parameters and MAOD values.
Several previous studies measured MAOD during swimming efforts [21, 22, 28, 29, 33]. Normally, these investigations named this index as accumulated oxygen deficit (AOD), which was determined during a non-exhaustive effort (i. e., constant-dis-tance effort [28, 29]) or during short efforts [26]. Thus, although 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.0 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Force (N) Retest VO2=(0.08•[Force–1])–0.81 VO 2 (L.min –1) R2=0.99 Test VO2=(0.08•[Force–1])–0.87 R2=0.99
Fig. 3 Linear relationship between oxygen
con-sumption (VO2) and the force during 6 submaximal efforts performed during test (closed symbols) and retest (open symbols). VO2-intensity parameters were relative to a linear relationship constructed with mean values of VO2 and submaximal force.
the intensity is too high, the distance (free swimming) or dura-tion of effort (tethered swimming) used did not necessarily lead swimmers to exhaustion, which may underestimate the maxi-mal anaerobic contribution during exercise (i. e., anaerobic capacity or MAOD). The relationship between MAOD and anaer-obic metabolism of swimmers was evidenced by 1) no effect of acute hypoxia exposition (i. e., independence of aerobic metabo-lism) [20]; 2) higher values induced by hypoxia training, which is related to improvements in muscle buffering capacity (i. e., tolerance to anaerobic metabolites) [20, 31]; and 3) values that are sensitive to 2-week high-intensity training but not to con-tinuous low-intensity training (i. e., 70 % do VO2PEAK for 60 min)
[20]. Thus, MAOD is a good tool for monitoring non-oxidative training adaptations.
The MAOD values observed in the present study (2.9 L; 45.3 mL. Kg − 1) were similar to those reported in swimming flumes (from
2.4 to 2.9 L) [21, 22] but higher than those observed in free (from 11.9 to 23.1 mL.Kg − 1) [28, 29] and tethered swimming (34.3 mL.
Kg − 1) [26]. Although the performance standard of the swimmers
was similar in the above-mentioned investigations (i. e., VO2PEAK~52.2 mL.Kg − 1), differences in the MAOD values may be
explained by factors related to the methods used to construct a VO2-intensity relationship (e. g., with 200 m efforts) and to the
characteristics of maximal efforts (e. g., constant-distance efforts) [17–20].
The characteristics of the VO2-intensity relationship appears to
influence the MAOD values [6, 7]. Although Medbo et al. [17] proposed the use of 20 submaximal efforts, other investigations have shown that parameters of the VO2-intensity relationship
may be determined by using a smaller number of submaximal efforts with a duration longer than 6 min [26, 28, 29, 34–36]. In this context, if only moderate intensities are applied during sub-maximal efforts (i. e., without exercise near VO2PEAK intensity),
the MAOD values appear to be altered more when the VO2
-intensity relationship is built using extreme values (low and high intensities) [19]. Thus, in the present study, the submaxi-mal intensities ranged between 47.2 and 96.1 % of MAF, thus decreasing the possible effects of a small number of submaximal efforts [19]. The only other study that investigated the reproduc-ibility of the VO2-intensity relationship used 6 submaximal
efforts [34], and this parameter is usually measured by a small number of efforts in free [28, 29] and tethered swimming [26]. Thus, using similar procedures as previous studies in cycling [34], we observed reproducibility of the parameters of the VO2
-intensity relationship in tethered swimming and demonstrated very low values of TE and CV that were accompanied by very strong values of ICC between the test and retest.
The intercept observed in the present study demonstrated nega-tive values. Peyrebrune et al. [26] showed similar results in teth-ered swimming, when the VO2-intensity relationship was
determined using 4 submaximal efforts lasting 5 min. The authors suggested that the negative values of the intercept may be related to a mechanical inefficiency that occurs at lower intensities in tethered swimming (i. e., no-propulsive use of legs), thereby contributing to a disproportional increase in VO2
that can lead to curvilinearity of the VO2-intensity relationship
[26]. In the present investigation, we used the same procedures of Peyrebrune et al. [26] and determined the VO2-intensity
rela-tionship by using high coefficients of determination (i. e., 0.91 < R2 < 0.99), which decreases the possible mistakes in the
measurement of O2 demand during the test and retest. The
mod-erate correlations for the coefficient of determination observed between the test and retest may be explained by high homoge-neity of these values, which influences the ICC analysis [12]. However, low TE and CV values indicate similarity between the test and retest and thus demonstrate the reproducibility of the coefficient of determination in tethered swimming.
Table 1 Mean values, standard deviation, effect size (ES), typical error (TE), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of the
maximal force reached during the incremental test (MAF) and of the parameters related to the VO2-intensity relationship parameters during test and retest situations.
Test Retest ES TE CV ICC
MAF (N) 59.4 ± 19.3 60.6 ± 19.5 0.06 2.6 4.3 0.98 *
Slope (L.min − 1. N − 1) 0.08 ± 0.02 0.08 ± 0.01 0.18 0.002 3.1 0.97 *
Intercept (L.min − 1) − 0.84 ± 0.51 − 0.79 ± 0.50 0.09 0.01 11.4 0.97 *
R2 0.96 ± 0.02 0.96 ± 0.03 0.01 0.02 1.8 0.47 *
R2: Coefficient of determination; * significant intraclass correlation coefficient (p < 0.05)
Test Retest ES TE CV ICC
Mean force (N) 56.4 ± 20.3 58.2 ± 20.3 0.09 2.1 3.6 0.99 * Tlim (s) 268.9 ± 78.2 241.7 ± 55.1 0.41 47.9 18.8 0.50 Accumulated O2 demand (L) 15.0 ± 4.0 14.0 ± 2.9 0.28 2.6 17.9 0.43 VO2ACU (L) 12.1 ± 3.7 11.2 ± 2.7 0.29 2.7 23.4 0.29 VO2BAS (L.min − 1) 0.5 ± 0.1 0.5 ± 0.1 0.39 0.1 17.4 0.33 VO2PEAK (L.min − 1) 3.3 ± 0.9 3.2 ± 0.9 0.16 0.3 8.9 0.90 * MAOD (L.O2) 2.9 ± 1.1 2.9 ± 1.0 0.02 0.3 9.5 0.93 * MAOD (mL.Kg − 1) 45.3 ± 14.0 45.2 ± 12.6 0.01 4.3 9.6 0.89 *
Mean force: mean force entire maximal effort; Tlim: time to exhaustion; Accumulated O2 demand: integral of oxygen demand to force obtained by VO2-intensity relationship; VO2BAS: oxygen uptake in baseline (i. e., 2 min before the beginning of the maximal effort); VO2ACU: integral of the oxygen uptake by the effort time; VO2PEAK: mean of the oxygen uptake observed in the last 30 s of effort; MAOD: maximal accumulated oxygen deficit; * significant intraclass correlation coefficient (p < 0.05)
Table 2 Mean values, standard
deviation, effect size (ES), typical error (TE), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the variables measured during the maximal effort during test and retest.
The present study did not verify the significant differences between the parameters that were measured at maximal effort during the test and retest; however, high values of TE and CV with no significant correlations were observed. These results contrast the observations made in cycling [34] and running tests [8]. However, in swimming, Alberty et al. [1] demonstrated that the velocity-constant effort was less reliable than distance-con-stant exercise was. This difference was attributed to a difference between the test and normal training/competition situations imposed on swimmers (i. e., fixed distances) [1]. In addition, psy-chological factors such as motivation and boredom may influ-ence the Tlim in constant-power exhaustive efforts [1, 32]. The results of the present study also demonstrated that intensity-constant effort presented low values of reproducibility in swim-mers, which can be explained by the lack of experience of swimmers in this type of exercise, as previously observed on a smaller scale in free swimming [1].
The current data reinforce the previous results showing that the MAOD values remained unchanged when they were determined during different maximal intensities (i. e., different Tlim) [17, 18, 34]. In swimming, Ogita et al. [23] observed stabilization in anaerobic contribution obtained by efforts with exhaustion between one and 6 min, thus demonstrating that MAOD can be archived during efforts with this range of Tlim. Thus, based on the Tlim values observed in tethered swimming using the same procedures [25], the present study measured the MAOD values during a maximal effort performed at 100 % of MAF, thus ensur-ing the maximal values of the anaerobic contribution (i. e., Tlim between one and 6 min). Moreover, the intensity used in the present investigation corresponds to the severe domain, which allows the maximal values to be reached [23] and avoids a mis-calculation of the MAOD values (i. e., negative values; [24]). As observed in studies using a cycle ergometer [34], our results demonstrated the high reproducibility of MAOD values meas-ured during tethered swimming, even with the large within-subject variation observed for Tlim values.
It is known that changes in swimming mechanics may occur during tethered swimming [9]; however, we used this specific methodological procedure to measure the MAOD values during continuous efforts. In fact, the turns and undulations observed during free swimming could compromise the oxygen uptake kinetics during submaximal and maximal efforts and could thus influence the determination of the VO2-intensity relationship
and the accumulated VO2 during the maximal effort performed
at 100 % of MAF. In summary, the present results demonstrate that tethered swimming may be used as an alternative test method for the determination of MAOD values and VO2
-inten-sity relationship parameters, presenting a reduced-cost test compared with using a swimming flume. Although the intro-duction of this methodology during training routines is unlikely due to the necessary number of sessions (8–9 days), researchers can use these results to validate tools with easy application for anaerobic capacity assessments of swimmers. Thus, the present study may contribute to an increase in investigations of the role of anaerobic capacity during swimming.
According to the present data, it is possible to conclude that the MAOD values and the VO2-intensity relationship parameters
measured in tethered swimming showed high reproducibility and may be used to assess the specific anaerobic capacity of swimmers.
Acknowledgements
▼
This study was supported by Fundação de Amparo à pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (n ° 2011/05357-9 and n ° 2011/16195–0).
Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to
declare. Affiliations
1 Rehabilitation and functional performance, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão
Preto, Brazil
2 Physiotherapy, Sao Paulo State University, Presidente Prudente, Brazil 3 School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto, University of São
Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
4 UNICAMP, Sport Sciences, Campinas, Brazil
5 Department of Physical Education, Sao Paulo State University, Bauru, Brazil 6 São Paulo, Physical Education, Rio Claro, Brazil
7 School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto, University of São
Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil References
1 Alberty M, Sidney M, Huot-Marchand F, Dekerle J, Bosquet L, Gorce P,
Lensel G. Reproducibility of performance in three types of training test
in swimming. Int J Sports Med 2006; 27: 623–628
2 Bangsbo J, Michalsik L, Petersen A. Accumulated O2 deficit dur-ing intense exercise and muscle characteristics of elite athletes. Int J Sports Med 1993; 14: 207–213
3 Barbosa T, Silva AJ, Reis AM, Costa M, Garrido N, Policarpo F, Reis VM. Kinematical changes in swimming front crawl and breaststroke with the AquaTrainer snorkel. Eur J Appl Physiol 2010; 109: 1155–1162 4 Bertuzzi RC, Franchini E, Ugrinowitsch C, Kokubun E, Lima-Silva AE,
Pires FO, Nakamura FY, Kiss MA. Predicting MAOD using only a
supramaximal exhaustive test. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 477–481 5 Bonen A, Wilson BA, Yarkony M, Belcastro AN. Maximal oxygen uptake
during free, tethered, and flume swimming. J Appl Physiol Respir Envi-ron Exerc Physiol 1980; 48: 232–235
6 Buck D, McNaughton L. Maximal accumulated oxygen deficit must be calculated using 10-min time periods. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31: 1346–1349
7 Buck D, McNaughton LR. Changing the number of submaximal exercise bouts effects calculation of MAOD. Int J Sports Med 1999; 20: 28–33 8 Doherty M, Smith PM, Schroder K. Reproducibility of the maximum accumulated oxygen deficit and run time to exhaustion during short-distance running. J Sports Sci 2000; 18: 331–338
9 Dominguez-Castells R, Arellano R. Effect of different loads on stroke and coordination parameters during freestyle semi-tethered swimming. J Hum Kinet 2012; 32: 33–41
10 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2016 update. Int J Sports Med 2015; 36: 1121–1124 11 Heigenhauser GJ, Faulkner JA. Estimation of cardiac output by the CO2
rebreathing method during tethered swimming. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol 1978; 44: 821–824
12 Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 2000; 30: 1–15
13 Jalab C, Enea C, Delpech N, Bernard O. Dynamics of oxygen uptake dur-ing a 100 m front crawl event, performed durdur-ing competition. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2011; 36: 219–225
14 Keskinen KL, Rodriguez FA, Keskinen OP. Respiratory snorkel and valve system for breath-by-breath gas analysis in swimming. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2003; 13: 322–329
15 Kuipers H, Verstappen FT, Keizer HA, Geurten P, van Kranenburg G. Vari-ability of aerobic performance in the laboratory and its physiologic correlates. Int J Sports Med 1985; 6: 197–201
16 Lima MC, Ribeiro LF, Papoti M, Santiago PR, Cunha SA, Martins LE,
Gob-atto CA. A semi-tethered test for power assessment in running. Int J
Sports Med 2011; 32: 529–534
17 Medbo JI, Mohn AC, Tabata I, Bahr R, Vaage O, Sejersted OM. Anaero-bic capacity determined by maximal accumulated O2 deficit. J Appl Physiol (1985) 1988; 64: 50–60
18 Medbo JI, Tabata I. Relative importance of aerobic and anaerobic energy release during short-lasting exhausting bicycle exercise. J Appl Physiol 1989; 67: 1881–1886
19 Noordhof DA, Foster C, de Koning JJ. The maximal accumulated oxygen deficit method: a valid and reliable measure of anaerobic capacity? Sports Med 2010; 40: 285–302
20 Ogita F. Energetics in competitive swimming and its application for training. In Biomedical and Medicine of Swimming VIII 2006; 117–121 21 Ogita F, Hara M, Tabata I. Anaerobic capacity and maximal oxygen uptake during arm stroke, leg kicking and whole body swimming. Acta Physiol Scand 1996; 157: 435–441
22 Ogita F, Onodera T, Tabata I. Effect of hand paddles on anaerobic energy release during supramaximal swimming. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31: 729–735
23 Ogita F, Onodera T, Tamaki H, Toussaint H, Hollander A, Wakayoshi K. Metabolic profile during exhaustive arm stroke, leg kick, and whole body swimming lasting 15 s to 10 min. In Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming IX 2003; 361–366
24 Ozyener F, Rossiter HB, Ward SA, Whipp BJ. Negative accumulated oxy-gen deficit during heavy and very heavy intensity cycle ergometry in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 2003; 90: 185–190
25 Papoti M, da Silva AS, Araujo GG, Santiago V, Martins LE, Cunha SA,
Gobatto CA. Aerobic and anaerobic performances in tethered
swim-ming. Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 712–719
26 Peyrebrune MC, Toubekis AG, Lakomy HK, Nevill ME. Estimating the energy contribution during single and repeated sprint swimming. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2014; 24: 369–376
27 Pinna M, Milia R, Roberto S, Marongiu E, Olla S, Loi A, Ortu M,
Migliac-cio GM, Tocco F, Concu A, Crisafulli A. Assessment of the specificity of
cardiopulmonary response during tethered swimming using a new snorkel device. J Physiol Sci 2013; 63: 7–16
28 Reis VM, Marinho DA, Barbosa FP, Reis AM, Guidetti L, Silva AJ. Exam-ining the accumulated oxygen deficit method in breaststroke swim-ming. Eur J Appl Physiol 2010; 109: 1129–1135
29 Reis VM, Marinho DA, Policarpo FB, Carneiro AL, Baldari C, Silva AJ. Examining the accumulated oxygen deficit method in front crawl swimming. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 421–427
30 Rhea MR. Determining the magnitude of treatment effects in strength training research through the use of the effect size. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18: 918–920
31 Roberts AD, Clark SA, Townsend NE, Anderson ME, Gore CJ, Hahn AG. Changes in performance, maximal oxygen uptake and maximal accu-mulated oxygen deficit after 5, 10 and 15 days of live high: train low altitude exposure. Eur J Appl Physiol 2003; 88: 390–395
32 Schabort EJ, Hopkins WG, Hawley JA. Reproducibility of self-paced treadmill performance of trained endurance runners. Int J Sports Med 1998; 19: 48–51
33 Truijens MJ, Toussaint HM, Dow J, Levine BD. Effect of high-intensity hypoxic training on sea-level swimming performances. J Appl Physiol 2003; 94: 733–743
34 Weber CL, Schneider DA. Reliability of MAOD measured at 110 % and 120 % of peak oxygen uptake for cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1056–1059
35 Zagatto A, Redkva P, Loures J, Kalva Filho C, Franco V, Kaminagakura E,
Papoti M. Anaerobic contribution during maximal anaerobic running
test: correlation with maximal accumulated oxygen deficit. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2011; 21: e222–e230
36 Zagatto AM, Gobatto CA. Relationship between anaerobic parameters provided from MAOD and critical power model in specific table tennis test. Int J Sports Med 2012; 33: 613–620
