Assessment of anaerobic power to verify VO2max attainment

Across various populations, verification testing is used to confirm VO₂max attainment and has repeatedly shown similar VO₂max values to those obtained from incremental exercise. Yet, many individuals show meaningful differences in VO₂max between protocols, and an explanation for this is unknown. The aim of the study was to elucidate this phenomenon in 30 men and women of similar age, fitness, and physical activity using assessment of anaerobic power. On day 1, they completed the Wingate test, and returned at least 48 h later to complete incremental cycle ergometry followed by a verification protocol. During exercise, ventilation, pulmonary gas exchange data, and heart rate (HR) were continuously measured. Mean VO₂max was similar (P > 0·05) between protocols (42·05 ± 5·88 ml kg^?1 per min versus 42·03 ± 5·75 ml kg^?1 per min, respectively), although seven subjects (23%) revealed a VO₂max that was not ‘verified’ by the supramaximal protocol. Indices of power output and gas exchange data were similar (P > 0·05) between subjects who revealed a ‘true’ VO₂max compared to those who did not, although peak and mean power was consistently higher in persons whose VO₂max was not ‘verified.’ A previously established HRmax criterion for verification testing was not met in 17% of subjects. Additional study is merited to identify alternate determinants of VO₂max, such as muscle activation via assessment of motor unit recruitment, and to investigate utility of verification testing to confirm VO₂max attainment in elite athletes and the elderly.