| Validity and reliability of the session RPE method for quantifying training in Australian Football: A comparison of the CR10 and CR100 scales. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 22450253 Owner: NLM Status: Publisher |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the criterion validity and test-retest reliability of the CR10 and CR100 rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scales for team sport athletes that undertake high intensity, intermittent exercise. Twenty one male Australian football (AF) players (age: 19.0 ± 1.8 years, body mass: 83.92 ± 7.88 kg) participated the first part (Part A) of this study which examined the construct validity of the session-RPE (sRPE) method for quantifying training load in AF. Ten male athletes (age: 16.1 ± 0.5 years) participated in the second part of the study (Part B), which compared the test-retest reliability of the CR10 and CR100 RPE scales. In Part A, the validity of the sRPE method was assessed by examining the relationships between sRPE, and objective measures of internal (i.e. heart rate) and external training load (i.e. distance travelled), collected from AF training sessions. Part B of the study assessed the reliability of sRPE through examining the test-retest reliability of sRPE during three different intensities of controlled intermittent running (10 km·hr, 11.5 km·hr and 13 km·hr). Results from Part A demonstrated strong correlations for CR10- and CR100-derived sRPE with measures of internal training load (Banisters TRIMP and Edwards TRIMP) (CR10: r = 0.83 and 0.83, and CR100: r = 0.80 and 0.81, p<0.05). Correlations between sRPE and external training load (Distance, higher speed running and player load) for both the CR10 (r = 0.81, 0.71 and 0.83) and CR100 (r = 0.78, 0.69 and 0.80) were significant (p<0.05). Results from Part B demonstrated poor reliability for both the CR10 (31.9% CV) and CR100 (38.6% CV) RPE scales following short bouts of intermittent running. Collectively, these results suggest both CR10 and CR100 derived sRPE methods have good construct validity for assessing training load in AF. The poor levels of reliability revealed under field testing indicate that the sRPE method may not be sensible to detecting small changes in exercise intensity during brief intermittent running bouts. Despite this limitation, the sRPE remains a valid method to quantify training loads in high intensity, intermittent team sport. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Tannath J Scott; Cameron Black; John Quinn; Aaron J Coutts |
Related Documents
:
|
8677513 - Comparative short-term health responses to sulfur dioxide exposure and other common str... 11091963 - The action spectrum for maximal photosensitivity of germination. 197603 - Synchronized ultradian cortisol rhythms in monkeys: persistence during corticotropin in... |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE Date: 2012-3-24 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association Volume: - ISSN: 1533-4287 ISO Abbreviation: - Publication Date: 2012 Mar |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2012-3-27 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 9415084 Medline TA: J Strength Cond Res Country: - |
Other Details:
|
Languages: ENG Pagination: - Citation Subset: - |
Affiliation:
|
a Human Performance Laboratory, University of Technology, Sydney, AUSTRALIA; b Centre for Health Technologies, University of Technology, Sydney, AUSTRALIA; c Greater Wester Sydney Giants, Blacktown, AUSTRALIA. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Lithium pretreatment reduces brain injury after intracerebral hemorrhage in rats.
Next Document: Muscle force output and electromyographic activity in squats with various unstable surfaces.