Graded Exercise Testing Versus Simulated Competition Exercise in Trained Older Males

Validity and Reliability of Facial Rating of Perceived Exertion Scales for Training Load Monitoring

ABSTRACT

van der Zwaard, S, Hooft Graafland, F, van Middelkoop, C, and Lintmeijer, LL. Validity and reliability of facial rating of perceived exertion scales for training load monitoring. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2022-Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is often used by coaches and athletes to indicate exercise intensity, which facilitates training load monitoring and prescription. Although RPE is typically measured using the Borg's category-ratio 10-point scale (CR10), digital sports platforms have recently started to incorporate facial RPE scales, which potentially have a better user experience. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of a 5-point facial RPE scale (FCR5) and a 10-point facial RPE scale (FCR10), using the CR10 as a golden standard and to assess their use for training load monitoring. Forty-nine subjects were grouped into 17 untrained (UT), 19 recreationally trained (RT), and 13 trained (T) individuals Subjects completed 9 randomly ordered home-based workout sessions (3 intensities × 3 RPE scales) on the Fitchannel.com platform. Heart rate was monitored throughout the workouts. Subjects performed 3 additional workouts to assess reliability. Validity and reliability of both facial RPE scales were low in UT subjects (intraclass correlation [ICC] ≤ 0.44, p ≤ 0.06 and ICC ≤ 0.43, p ≥ 0.09). In RT and T subjects, validity was moderate for FCR5 (ICC ≥ 0.72, p < 0.001) and good for FCR10 (ICC ≥ 0.80, p < 0.001). Reliability for these groups was rather poor for FCR5 (ICC = 0.51, p = 0.006) and moderate for FCR10 (ICC = 0.74, p < 0.001), but it was excellent for CR10 (ICC = 0.92, p < 0.001). In RT and T subjects, session RPE scores were also strongly related to Edward's training impulse scores ( r ≥ 0.70, p < 0.001). User experience was best supported by the FCR10 scale. In conclusion, researchers, coaches, strength and conditioning professionals, and digital sports platforms are encouraged to incorporate the valid and reliable FCR10 and not FCR5 to assess perceived exertion and internal training load of recreationally trained and trained individuals.

The Role of the Rating-of-Perceived-Exertion Template in Pacing

The rating-of-perceived-exertion (RPE) template is thought to regulate pacing and has been shown to be very robust in different circumstances.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose was to investigate whether the RPE template can be manipulated by changing the race distance during the course of a time trial. The secondary purpose was to study how athletes cope with this manipulation, especially in terms of the RPE template.

METHOD

Trained male subjects (N = 10) performed 3 cycling time trials: a 10-km (TT10), a 15-km (TT15), and a manipulated 15-km (TTman). During the TTman, subjects started the time trial believing that they were going to perform a 10-km time trial. However, at 7.5 km they were told that it was a 15-km time trial.

RESULTS

A significant main effect of time-trial condition on RPE scores until kilometer 7.5 was found (P = .016). Post hoc comparisons showed that the RPE values of the TT15 were lower than the RPE values of the TT10 (difference 0.60; CI95% 0.11, 1.0) and TTman (difference 0.73; CI95% 0.004, 1.5). After the 7.5 km, a transition phase occurs, in which an interaction effect is present (P = .011). After this transition phase, the RPE values of TTman and TT15 did not statistically differ (P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

This novel distance-endpoint manipulation demonstrates that it is possible to switch between RPE templates. A clear shift in RPE during the TTman is present between the RPE templates of the TT10 and TT15. The shift strongly supports suggestions that pacing is regulated using an RPE template.