Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Does a priming warm-up influence the incidence of V˙O2pl during a ramp test and verification phase?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Does a priming warm-up influence the incidence of V˙O2pl during a ramp test and verification phase?
Do you wish to request the book?
Does a priming warm-up influence the incidence of V˙O2pl during a ramp test and verification phase?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Does a priming warm-up influence the incidence of V˙O2pl during a ramp test and verification phase?
2025
Overview
ObjectiveThis study compared the effects of two different warm-up protocols (normal vs. priming) on the oxygen plateau () incidence rate during a ramp test. It also compared the cardiopulmonary responses during the ramp test and subsequent verification phase.MethodsEleven recreational cyclists performed two experimental visits. The first visit required a normal warm-up (cycling at 50 W for 10 min) followed by the ramp test (30 W.min-1) and supramaximal verification phase with 30 min rest between tests. The second visit required a priming warm-up (cycling at 50 W for 4 min increasing to 70% difference between the gas exchange threshold [GET] and maximum work rate [WRmax] for 6 min) followed by the same protocol as in the first visit. Physiological responses were collected during the exercise and compared. Oxygen kinetics ( Kinetics) and incidence rate were determined during the ramp tests for both visits.ResultsAs planned, following the warm-up the priming visit experienced greater physiological response. However, the incidence rate of during the ramp test was the same between visits (73%), and maximal oxygen uptake was not different between visits after the ramp test (normal, 4.0 ± 0.8; primed, 4.0 ± 0.7 L·min−1, p = 0.230) and verification phase (normal, 3.8 ± 0.6; primed, 3.8 ± 0.7 L·min−1, p = 0.924) using a Holm-Bonferroni correction for controlling family-wise error rate. Kinetics were not different between visits during the ramp test (normal, 10.8 ± 1.1; primed, 10.8 ± 1.2 mL·min−1·W-1, p = 0.407). The verification phase confirmed in 100% for both the normal and priming visits.ConclusionOur hypothesis that a priming warm-up facilitates the incidence rate of during a ramp test is not supported by the results. The verification phase remains a prudent option when determining a ‘true’ is required.
