RESUMO
While the session-RPE (rating of perceived exertion) method can quantify training volume in athletes, this method is not able to evaluate energy expenditure (EE) during a training session. We developed an RPE-based activity record for assessing EE during athletic training, and we compared its results to those obtained using the flex-heart rate (flex-HR) method. The EE of nine female collegiate endurance runners was assessed by the RPE-based activity record and flex-HR methods during eight days in the normal training season. Subjects were asked to record their RPE in the record at 5-minute intervals, and to wear a HR monitor during training. All subjects also participated in an incremental treadmill exercise test, which was used to determine their RPE-EE and HR-EE regression equations. Although the RPE-based activity record significantly overestimated EE (RPE-activity record, 572 kcal/session; flex-HR method, 499 kcal/session; <i>p</i> = 0.031), it had high validity relative to the flex-HR method (intra-class correlation coefficient, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, 0.845–0.923) and there were no systematic errors in EE estimation between the two methods. Therefore, the RPE-based activity record can be used to assess EE during training in female runners. However, RPE-based activity record might overestimate EE for athletes who have more intermittent activities during training than endurance runners, because RPE takes more time for returning to the resting level than HR when the intensity of activity declines. Further research is needed to verify the validity of the RPE-based activity record for assessing EE during other sporting activities or measurement conditions, and to identify the factors affecting the degree of estimation error associated with this method.
RESUMO
The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of activity record (AR), accelerometer (AC) and heart rate (HR) methods in comparison with the doubly-labeled water (DLW) method as the criterion measure of total energy expenditure (TEE) in high school students undergoing vigorous activities. Twelve baseball players in Japanese high school (16.5±0.5 yrs) were monitored for seven consecutive days. TEE values obtained over a 3-day-period by AR, AC and HR were simultaneously validated against TEE measured by DLW over a 7-day-period. TEE value measured by DLW was 4922±391 kcal/day. The Physical activity level (PAL=TEE/BMR (basal metabolic rate)) was 2.66±0.14. TEE estimated by AR, AC and HR was significantly different from DLW, with mean differences of -13.9±6.5%, 35.3±3.6% and 31.6±23.9%, respectively. However, TEE estimated by AC and AR significantly correlated with that measured by DLW (r=0.73, r=0.70, p<0.05, respectively). The limits of agreement between DLW and AR, AC and HR were from -1350 kcal/d to -21 kcal/d, -2293 kcal/d to -1192 kcal/d, and 3875 kcal/d to -797 kcal/d respectively. AC was superior to the other methods. However, the limits of agreement in AR were similar to AC. These data suggest that on accuracy and precision, AR would be superior to the other two for predicting TEE in high school students undergoing vigorous activities. However, AC has the advantages being able to examine patterns of activity over long periods of time without interfering with normal movement and the ability to store data continuously over long periods of time. Therefore, it was suggested that, simultaneously, the AR and AC methods are accurate predictors of TEE and patterns of activity while undergoing sports vigorous activities.