Wingate test, when time and overdue fatigue matter: Validity and sensitivity of two time-shortened versions

12Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the validity and sensitivity of two time-shortened Wingate anaerobic tests (WAnTs), by means of three phases. In Phase A, 40 participants performed a traditional 30 s WAnT, whereas the first 15 s (WAnT15 ) and 20 s (WAnT20 ) were used to elaborate two predictive models. In Phase B, another 30 s WAnT was performed by 15 different volunteers to examine the error of these models (cross-validation). Finally, in Phase C, a 30 s WAnT was registered before and after a 10-week velocity-based training conducted by 22 different participants (training group, TRAIN = 11; control group that fully refrained from any type of training, CONTROL = 11). Power changes (in Watts, W) after this training intervention were used to interpret the sensitivity of the time-shortened WAnT. Adjusted coefficient of determination (R2 ) was reported for each regression model, whereas the cross-validation analysis included the smallest detectable change (SDC) and bias. Close relationships were found between the traditional 30 s WAnT and both the WAnT15 (R2 = 0.98) and WAnT20 (R2 = 0.99). Cross-validation analysis showed a lower error and bias for WAnT20 (SDC = 9.3 W, bias = −0.1 W) compared to WAnT15 (SDC = 22.2 W, bias = 1.8 W). Lastly, sensitivity to identify individual changes was higher for WAnT20 (TRAIN = 11/11 subjects, CONTROL = 9/11 subjects) than for WAnT15 (TRAIN = 4/11 subjects, CONTROL = 2/11 subjects). These findings suggest that the WAnT20 could become a valid and sensitive protocol to replace the traditional 30 s WAnT.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hernández-Belmonte, A., Buendía-Romero, Á., Martínez-Cava, A., Courel-Ibáñez, J., Mora-Rodríguez, R., & Pallarés, J. G. (2020). Wingate test, when time and overdue fatigue matter: Validity and sensitivity of two time-shortened versions. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 10(22), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free