Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Pulmonary Medicine
Volume 2012, Article ID 542402, 10 pages
Research Article

Determination of Best Criteria to Determine Final and Initial Speeds within Ramp Exercise Testing Protocols

1Department of Sports Science, Brazilian Olympic Committee, Avenida das Américas 899, 22631-000 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
2Laboratory of Physical Activity and Health Promotion, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rua São Francisco Xavier 524, Sala 8121F, 20550-900 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
3Graduate Program in Sciences of Physical Activity, Salgado de Oliveira University, Rua Marechal Deodoro 217, No. 2 Andar, 24030-060 Niteroi, RJ, Brazil
4Graduate Program in Medical Sciences, Rio de Janeiro State University, Avenida Professor Manoel de Abreu, 444/No. 2 Andar, Vila Isabel, 20550-170 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
5Cardiology Division, Palo Alto VA Health Care System, Cardiology 111C, 3801 Miranda Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA

Received 20 May 2012; Revised 25 September 2012; Accepted 25 September 2012

Academic Editor: Darcy D. Marciniuk

Copyright © 2012 Sidney C. da Silva et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


This study compared strategies to define final and initial speeds for designing ramp protocols. was directly assessed in 117 subjects (  yrs) and estimated by three nonexercise models: (1) Veterans Specific Activity Questionnaire (VSAQ); (2) Rating of Perceived Capacity (RPC); (3) Questionnaire of Cardiorespiratory Fitness (CRF). Thirty seven subjects (  yrs) performed three additional tests with initial speeds corresponding to 50% of estimated and 50% and 60% of measured . Significant differences were found between measured (  mL·kg−1·min−1) and estimated by VSAQ (  mL·kg−1·min−1) and CRF (  mL·kg−1·min−1), but not RPC (  mL·kg−1·min−1). The CRF had the highest ICC, the lowest SEE, and better limits of agreement with compared to the other instruments. Initial speeds from 50%–60% estimated by CRF or measured produced similar ( ; ;  mL·kg−1·min−1 resp., ). The closest relationship to identity line was found in tests beginning at 50% estimated by CRF. In conclusion, CRF was the best option to estimate and therefore to define the final speed for ramp protocols. The measured was independent of initial speeds, but speeds higher than 50% produced poorer submaximal relationships between workload and .