Individual versus Standardized Running Protocols in the Determination of VO2max

The purpose of this study was to determine whether an individually designed incremental exercise protocol results in greater rates of oxygen uptake (VO_2max) than standardized testing. Fourteen well-trained, male runners performed five incremental protocols in randomized order to measure their VO_2max: i) an incremental test (INC_S+I) with pre-defined increases in speed (2 min at 8.64 km·h⁻¹, then a rise of 1.44 km·h⁻¹ every 30 s up to 14.4 km·h⁻¹) and thereafter inclination (0.5° every 30 s); ii) an incremental test (INC_I) at constant speed (14.4 km·h⁻¹) and increasing inclination (2° every 2 min from the initial 0°); iii) an incremental test (INC_S) at constant inclination (0°) and increasing speed (0.5 km·h⁻¹ every 30 s from the initial 12.0 km·h⁻¹); iv) a graded exercise protocol (GXP) at a 1° incline with increasing speed (initially 8.64 km·h⁻¹ + 1.44 km·h⁻¹ every 5 min); v) an individual exercise protocol (INDXP) in which the runner chose the inclination and speed. VO_2max was lowest (-4.2%) during the GXP (p = 0.01; d = 0.06-0.61) compared to all other tests. The highest rating of perceived exertion, heart rate, ventilation and end-exercise blood lactate concentration were similar between the different protocols (p < 0.05). The time to exhaustion ranged from 7 min 18 sec (INC_S) to 25 min 30 sec (GXP) (p = 0.01).The VO_2max attained by employing an individual treadmill protocol does not differ from the values derived from various standardized incremental protocols.

Key points

• The mean maximum oxygen uptake during the GXP was lower than for all other tests.
• Differences in the maximum rate of oxygen uptake between the various protocols exhibited considerable inter-individual variation.
• From the current findings, it can be concluded that well trained athletes are able to perform an individually designed treadmill running protocol.

Key words: Maximum oxygen uptake, aerobic power, treadmill running, ramp test, treadmill protocol     

Validation of low-cost models for minimal invasive surgery training of congenital diaphragmatic hernia and esophageal atresia

BackgroundMinimal invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for the correction of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and esophageal atresia (EA). It is important to master these complex procedures, preferably preclinically, to avoid complications. The aim of this study was to validate recently developed models to train these MIS procedures preclinically.MethodsTwo low cost, reproducible models (one for CDH and one for EA) were validated during several pediatric surgical conferences and training sessions (January 2017–December 2018), used in either the LaparoscopyBoxx or EoSim simulator. Participants used one or both models and completed a questionnaire regarding their opinion on realism (face validity) and didactic value (content validity), rated on a five-point-Likert scale.ResultsOf all 60 participants enrolled, 44 evaluated the EA model. All items were evaluated as significantly better than neutral, with means ranging from 3.7 to 4.1 (p < 0.001). The CDH model was evaluated by 48 participants. All items scored significantly better than neutral (means 3.5–3.9, p < 0.001), with exception of the haptics of the simulated diaphragm (mean 3.3, p = 0.054). Both models were considered a potent training tool (means 3.9).ConclusionThese readily available and low budget models are considered a valid and potent training tool by both experts and target group participants.Type of studyProspective study.Level of evidenceLevel II.