Skip to content
Back to outputs

Practical considerations for assessing pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation during flume swimming using the MetaSwim metabolic cart

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Practical considerations for assessing pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation during flume swimming using the MetaSwim metabolic cart. / Lomax, Mitch; Mayger, B.; Saynor, Zoe; Vine, C.; Massey, Heather.

In: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, Vol. 33, No. 7, 01.07.2019, p. 1941-1953.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Lomax, Mitch ; Mayger, B. ; Saynor, Zoe ; Vine, C. ; Massey, Heather. / Practical considerations for assessing pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation during flume swimming using the MetaSwim metabolic cart. In: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019 ; Vol. 33, No. 7. pp. 1941-1953.

Bibtex

@article{27036d3fe032415e83f1215cc1f0c7db,
title = "Practical considerations for assessing pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation during flume swimming using the MetaSwim metabolic cart",
abstract = "The MetaSwim (MS) metabolic cart can assess pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation in aquatic environments. The aims of this study were: 1) to determine the agreement between minute ventilation ({\.V}E), pulmonary oxygen uptake ({\.V}O2) and carbon dioxide output ({\.V}CO2) using the MS and Douglas Bag (DB) methods during flume swimming; 2) to assess the repeatability of these and other MS derived parameters. Sixteen trained swimmers completed a combined incremental and supramaximal verification cardiopulmonary swimming test to determine maximal {\.V}O2, two progressive intensity swimming tests during which MS and DB measurements were made (agreement protocol), and/or three-four constant velocity submaximal swimming tests during which only the MS was used (repeatability protocol). Agreement was determined using limits of agreement (LoA), bias, random error and 95% confidence intervals with systematic bias assessed using paired samples t-tests. Within-trial and between trial repeatability were determined using the coefficient of variation (CV) and the repeatability coefficient (CR). Where data were heteroscedastic, LoA and CR were logtransformed, anti-logged and displayed as ratios. MS underestimated peak {\.V}O2 and {\.V}CO2 (<0.39 L.min-1) and {\.V}E (9.08 L.min-1), while submaximal values varied between 2-5% for CV and ±1.09-1.22 for ratio CR. The test re-test CV during constant velocity swimming for {\.V}E, tidal volume, breathing frequency, {\.V}O2, {\.V}CO2, and end-tidal pressures of O2 and CO2 was < 9% (ratio CR of ±1.09-1.34). Thus, the MS and DB cannot be used interchangeably. Whether the MS is suitable for evaluating ventilatory and pulmonary responses in swimming will depend upon the size of effect required.",
author = "Mitch Lomax and B. Mayger and Zoe Saynor and C. Vine and Heather Massey",
note = "12 month embargo DOI not yet working - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002801",
year = "2019",
month = jul,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1519/JSC.0000000000002801",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "1941--1953",
journal = "Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research",
issn = "1064-8011",
publisher = "NSCA National Strength and Conditioning Association",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical considerations for assessing pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation during flume swimming using the MetaSwim metabolic cart

AU - Lomax, Mitch

AU - Mayger, B.

AU - Saynor, Zoe

AU - Vine, C.

AU - Massey, Heather

N1 - 12 month embargo DOI not yet working - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002801

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - The MetaSwim (MS) metabolic cart can assess pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation in aquatic environments. The aims of this study were: 1) to determine the agreement between minute ventilation (V̇E), pulmonary oxygen uptake (V̇O2) and carbon dioxide output (V̇CO2) using the MS and Douglas Bag (DB) methods during flume swimming; 2) to assess the repeatability of these and other MS derived parameters. Sixteen trained swimmers completed a combined incremental and supramaximal verification cardiopulmonary swimming test to determine maximal V̇O2, two progressive intensity swimming tests during which MS and DB measurements were made (agreement protocol), and/or three-four constant velocity submaximal swimming tests during which only the MS was used (repeatability protocol). Agreement was determined using limits of agreement (LoA), bias, random error and 95% confidence intervals with systematic bias assessed using paired samples t-tests. Within-trial and between trial repeatability were determined using the coefficient of variation (CV) and the repeatability coefficient (CR). Where data were heteroscedastic, LoA and CR were logtransformed, anti-logged and displayed as ratios. MS underestimated peak V̇O2 and V̇CO2 (<0.39 L.min-1) and V̇E (9.08 L.min-1), while submaximal values varied between 2-5% for CV and ±1.09-1.22 for ratio CR. The test re-test CV during constant velocity swimming for V̇E, tidal volume, breathing frequency, V̇O2, V̇CO2, and end-tidal pressures of O2 and CO2 was < 9% (ratio CR of ±1.09-1.34). Thus, the MS and DB cannot be used interchangeably. Whether the MS is suitable for evaluating ventilatory and pulmonary responses in swimming will depend upon the size of effect required.

AB - The MetaSwim (MS) metabolic cart can assess pulmonary gas exchange and ventilation in aquatic environments. The aims of this study were: 1) to determine the agreement between minute ventilation (V̇E), pulmonary oxygen uptake (V̇O2) and carbon dioxide output (V̇CO2) using the MS and Douglas Bag (DB) methods during flume swimming; 2) to assess the repeatability of these and other MS derived parameters. Sixteen trained swimmers completed a combined incremental and supramaximal verification cardiopulmonary swimming test to determine maximal V̇O2, two progressive intensity swimming tests during which MS and DB measurements were made (agreement protocol), and/or three-four constant velocity submaximal swimming tests during which only the MS was used (repeatability protocol). Agreement was determined using limits of agreement (LoA), bias, random error and 95% confidence intervals with systematic bias assessed using paired samples t-tests. Within-trial and between trial repeatability were determined using the coefficient of variation (CV) and the repeatability coefficient (CR). Where data were heteroscedastic, LoA and CR were logtransformed, anti-logged and displayed as ratios. MS underestimated peak V̇O2 and V̇CO2 (<0.39 L.min-1) and V̇E (9.08 L.min-1), while submaximal values varied between 2-5% for CV and ±1.09-1.22 for ratio CR. The test re-test CV during constant velocity swimming for V̇E, tidal volume, breathing frequency, V̇O2, V̇CO2, and end-tidal pressures of O2 and CO2 was < 9% (ratio CR of ±1.09-1.34). Thus, the MS and DB cannot be used interchangeably. Whether the MS is suitable for evaluating ventilatory and pulmonary responses in swimming will depend upon the size of effect required.

UR - http://www.wkopenhealth.com/inst-fund.php

U2 - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002801

DO - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002801

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 1941

EP - 1953

JO - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

JF - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

SN - 1064-8011

IS - 7

ER -

ID: 10844586