Rekha Chaturvedi et al. Comparison of Treadmill Based Walk Test with Standard Rockport Testing
International Journal of Health Sciences & Research (www.ijhsr.org) 216
Vol.8; Issue: 1; January 2018
on field would increase its utility.
Performing Rockport 1 mile test on
treadmill would improve close subject
monitoring and allows testing when not
having access to measured miles also,
controlled lab environment would improve
the reliability and repeatability. Since it is
done in track, environmental factors could
affect the estimation which could be
prevented by treadmill based estimation.
Reliability of treadmill based 1-mile walk
test was first reported by Widrick et al.
[6]
subsequently published in Indian literature
too.
[7]
But it has to be seen whether it can
be administered in Indian middle aged
population or not. So the purpose of this
study is to determine whether Rockport 1
mile testing on treadmill is better method of
estimating VO
2
max than standard method
of Rockport 1 mile walk test in Indian
population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Forty subjects (20 male and 20
females) age ranging from 30 years to 50
years were selected by convenient sampling
from the neighbourhood. The participants
were excluded if they had history of
cardiovascular disease; back pain from last
1 months; knee pain from last 1 month and
are on blood pressure medications and had
no history of acute or chronic medical
condition. The qualified participants were
asked to read and sign an informed consent
form.
Each selected participant were asked
to complete 3 exercise tests: 1 mile brisk
walking on treadmill on baseline and after
rest of 4 days one mile brisk walking on the
track followed by one mile brisk walking on
treadmill again with a gap of 4 days . Time
taken to complete the distance and heart rate
(HR) at the end of tests were recorded along
with age and sex. HR was measured with a
pulseoxymeter and the time to complete the
distance was noted with a stop watch. Each
test was conducted on separate day with at
least 4 days gap in between the tests to
eliminate possible fatigue effects.
[8]
On baseline, body weight to nearest
to 1.0 kg and height to the nearest to 1.0 cm
were measured. Participants were instructed
to take good sleep (at least 6-8 hrs) and to
avoid too much food, caffeine, tobacco
products or alcohol for 3 hours prior to
testing.
[2]
Participants were also asked to
avoid strenuous exercise 12 hrs prior to
testing.Out of the forty subjects 2 females
were not able to complete the treadmill test
on Day 1 because of exertion so were
excluded from the study.
Following a familiarization trial on
day 1 each subject was asked to walk
briskly on electromechanical flat treadmill
[Bodyfit, India] for 1-mile. On day 5, the
subjects were asked to 1-mile brisk walk on
a track and a Pedometer was used to
measure the distance. The subjects were
reminded to maintain the speed throughout
the test without running or jogging. On day
10 the subjects completed the testing after
walking on treadmill again for 1 mile.
Aerobic power was calculated using
following formula:
VO2max [ml.kg
-1
.min
-1
] =132.853 - 0.0769
(weight in pounds) - 0.3877 (age in years) +
6.315 (1 for male; 0 for female) - 3.2649
(time in minutes) - 0.1565 (heart rate in
beats.min
-1
)
Statistical Analysis
Data was analysed using IBM-SPSS
software (version 21.0). Pearson Co-relation
was used to determine the co-relation
between the variables.
RESULTS
Mean (standard deviation) of VO2
max on 1
st
time (T1) and 2
nd
time (T2) on
treadmill was 34.68 (9.99) ml.Kg
-1
.min
-1
and 35.21 (9.67) ml.Kg.min-1 respectively
suggesting no significant difference between
the readings. However, track based value for
VO2 max was significantly lower [22.29
(14.66)] than treadmill based. 4 female
participants reading were excluded as their
VO2 max was too low (negative readings).
An excellent correlation exists (r
0.960) between 1
st
and 2
nd
treadmill based
value for VO2 max (Figure 1), but the level