Peak Responses to Graded Exercise Protocols in Young Children

ABSTRACT Introduction This study compared physiological and subjective measures resulting from maximal graded exercise testing (GXTmax) when the traditional Bruce protocol and a protocol designed specifically for pediatric populations (Pediatric Exercise Physiology (PEP) Lab protocol) were employed in children of varying adiposities. Methods Participants included 48 children (24 males, 24 females; ages 7–11 yr). GXTmax variables of interest included peak oxygen consumption (V·O 2peak ), peak heart rate (HRpeak), peak systolic blood pressure (SBPpeak), peak respiratory exchange ratio (RERpeak), and protocol duration. Participants were also asked to subjectively determine which GXTmax they perceived as more difficult. Results Comparing the whole group, there were no significant differences in V·O 2peak or HRpeak between protocols; however, the PEP Lab GXTmax produced significantly greater SBPpeak and significantly lower RERpeak. All physiological variables were moderately or strongly associated between the two protocols (explained variance ranged from 23.9% to 68.5%). In addition, 87.5% of participants subjectively rated the PEP Lab protocol as easiest to complete. Conclusions Although similar V·O 2peak and HRpeak measures were achieved, a lower perceived level of difficulty was observed for the PEP Lab protocol. We speculate that the PEP Lab protocol resulted in higher SBPpeak and lower RERpeak due to the lower initial intensity and smaller stage intensity increments, which may have permitted more gradual cardiorespiratory and metabolic adjustments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Exercise Sport and Movement
Published
2025-02-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/esm.0000000000000040
Primary Topic
Children's Physical and Motor Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Peak Responses to Graded Exercise Protocols in Young Children

Jody L. Clasey, Tori L. Vogelaar, Michael A. Samaan, Trey R. Naylor et al.
Exercise Sport and Movement
Children's Physical and Motor Development
article

Peak Responses to Graded Exercise Protocols in Young Children

Jody L. Clasey, Tori L. Vogelaar, Michael A. Samaan, Trey R. Naylor, Mariana V. Jacobs
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction This study compared physiological and subjective measures resulting from maximal graded exercise testing (GXTmax) when the traditional Bruce protocol and a protocol designed specifically for pediatric populations (Pediatric Exercise Physiology (PEP) Lab protocol) were employed in children of varying adiposities. Methods Participants included 48 children (24 males, 24 females; ages 7–11 yr). GXTmax variables of interest included peak oxygen consumption (V·O 2peak ), peak heart rate (HRpeak), peak systolic blood pressure (SBPpeak), peak respiratory exchange ratio (RERpeak), and protocol duration. Participants were also asked to subjectively determine which GXTmax they perceived as more difficult. Results Comparing the whole group, there were no significant differences in V·O 2peak or HRpeak between protocols; however, the PEP Lab GXTmax produced significantly greater SBPpeak and significantly lower RERpeak. All physiological variables were moderately or strongly associated between the two protocols (explained variance ranged from 23.9% to 68.5%). In addition, 87.5% of participants subjectively rated the PEP Lab protocol as easiest to complete. Conclusions Although similar V·O 2peak and HRpeak measures were achieved, a lower perceived level of difficulty was observed for the PEP Lab protocol. We speculate that the PEP Lab protocol resulted in higher SBPpeak and lower RERpeak due to the lower initial intensity and smaller stage intensity increments, which may have permitted more gradual cardiorespiratory and metabolic adjustments.

Exercise Sport and MovementVol. 3(2)
University of Kentucky (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Children's Physical and Motor Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.