Validity and Reliability of the VO2, Lab Report Example

Discussion

The main objective of this research was to examine if vacuumed Master Pro is a valid analyzer in computing oxygen intake throughout regular exercises of 35%, 50%, and 75% of VO2 max. A portable device precisely detects the expired gas component and exchanges in VO2, opening to the latest research approach and availability. The most crucial finding in this research is that the validity was identical for the Vo2 master model as contrasted with the VE. The Vo2 master had a tolerable validity as depicted by the Pearson correlation factor, which might be an attractive alternative for VO₂ and VE assessment.

The Bland Altman Vo2 in figure 1 shows an ideal agreeability and least variance across the whole range with a person correction of R2 = 0.9664, p < 0.01, which depicts superior dependability (Saenz, D. 2020).  Both the ventilation and VO2 had a strong correlation between the vacuumed and the VO2 Master Pro. The research by Montoye et al. (2020) examined the cogency and dependability of the Vo2 Master Pro metabolic analyzer for appraisal of oxygen intake (Vo2) and minute ventilation (VE). Shete et al. (2014) examined the Vo2 max and the percentage of fats in the body in athletes. The research aimed to explore the correlation between Vo2 ma and body fat percentage. This result is different from the above-published research since, in this study, we used the V02 max, which is measured precisely by exhaling gas when doing the sequence ergometry to volitional exhaustion (Montoye et al. 2020). The sub-minimal test was created to reduce the threat linked to energetic exercises and to enable approximation of aerobic abilities devoid of the cost and professionalism needed by exhaled gas assessments; however, there are intrinsic constraints in the preciseness of Vo2 max approximation from the submaximal test.

From figure 2, the Bland Altman ventilation graph depicts that the strong line is biased, and the dotted line represents a person correlation of 0.0403>0.001. R2 values of 0.0403> 0.01 imply that the ventilation andVo2 indicate no statistically significant bias, with the slope passing across one and intercepting through zero means that the mean percent variation is less than one percent. Previous research by Montoye et al. (2020) established the correctness of the moveable “metabolic cart K5” by contrasting with a fixed metabolic cart “Vyntus CPX” in checking on the cogency of “Vyntus CPX” with the use of butane ignition testing and assessing the dependability of K5 during lengthy exercise. The Bland-Altman assessment was used in this study since it is a straightforward and precise approach to quantifying agreement involving two variables and might aid a clinician in contrasting the latest appraisal approach against another one (Montoye et al. 2020).

About the questionnaire, figure 2 shows that most of the respondents exceptionally agreed with the question given, and thus, they preferred the Vacuumed unit in contrast with portable Vo2. This outcome was evaluated using paired t-test, and it was considered statistically significant since the p was less than 0.05 (Lundby et al., 2017).

Limitations

The sample size was small, making it hard to establish if a specific result is a correct finding and, in the presence of type 2 errors, might exist. As a result, a small sample size minimizes the power of the research and increases the margin of error, which may render the study worthless. At times information concerning every unit of the population is needed, which makes it likely only through comprehensive listing since a sample will not serve the objectives

Conclusion

The research finding shows that vacuumed master pro is an effective analyzer in evaluating oxygen intake during constant exercises of 35%, 50%, and 75% of VO2 max.  The person correlation for ventilation shows no relative or fixed bias, with the confidence level crossing the line zero and one concurrently. As a result, the inter-dependability of the V02 master pro was ideal with the vacuumed analyzer. This outcome is similar to a typical VO2 analyzer like the Cosmed K5.

References

Lundby, C., Montero, D., & Joyner, M. (2017). Biology of VO₂ max: looking under the physiology lamp. Acta Physiologica (Oxford, England), 220(2), 218–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/apha.12827

Montoye, A., Vondrasek, J. D., & Hancock, J. B. (2020). Validity and Reliability of the VO2    Master Pro for Oxygen Consumption and Ventilation Assessment. International Journal of Exercise Science, 13(4), 1382–1401.   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7523887/

Perez-Suarez, I., Martin-Rincon M., Gonzalez-Henriquez J. J., Fezzardi C., Perez-Regalado S., Galvan-Alvarez V., Juan-Habib J. W., Morales-Alamo D. & Calbet J. A. L. (2018). Accuracy and Precision of the COSMED K5 Portable Analyser. Frontiers in Physiology, 9:1764. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.01764

Psota, T., & Chen, K. Y. (2013). Measuring energy expenditure in clinical populations: rewards and challenges. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 67(5), 436–442. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.38

Ross, R., ALDuhishy, A., & González-Haro, C. (2020). Validation of the COSMED K4b² Portable Metabolic System During Running Outdoors. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 34(1), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003050

Saenz, A. D. (2020 December 9). Metabolic Cart Technique. Medscape, https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2009552-technique

Shete, A. N., Bute, S. S., & Deshmukh, P. R. (2014). A Study of VO2 Max and Body Fat Percentage in Female Athletes. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research: JCDR, 8(12), BC01–BC3. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/10896.5329

Singer, P., & Singer, J. (2016). Clinical Guide for the Use of Metabolic Carts: Indirect   Calorimetry–No Longer the Orphan of Energy Estimation. Nutrition in Clinical Practice: Official Publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 31(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0884533615622536

Yartsev, A. (2021). Estimation of energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry. Deranged Psychology. https://derangedphysiology.com/main/required-reading/endocrinology-metabolism-and-nutrition/Chapter%20113/estimation-energy-expenditure-indirect-calorimetry