Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Biological Research For Nursing
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by D’Alonzo, K. T.
Right arrow Articles by Vincent, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by D’Alonzo, K. T.
Right arrow Articles by Vincent, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A Comparison of Field Methods to Assess Cardiorespiratory Fitness Among Neophyte Exercisers

Karen T. D’Alonzo, PhD, RN, APNC

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, College of Nursing, Newark, kdalonzo{at}rutgers.edu

Kate Marbach, RN

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, College of Nursing, Newark

Linda Vincent, MSN, RN, APNC

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, College of Nursing, Newark

There is evidence to suggest that aerobic fitness levels among adults have declined markedly over the past 2 to 3 decades. Submaximal field measures of aerobic fitness, such as step tests, may now be seen as aversive by contemporary neophyte exercisers. In this study, a single-factor within-subjects (repeated measures) factorial design was used to compare three field measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among sedentary women: (a) the Queen’s College step test (QCST), (b) the Rockport 1-mile walk (RW), and (c) a nonexercise estimation of VO2 max (NE). The sample consisted of 31 racially and ethnically diverse female college students (mean age of 24.8 years). No significant within-subjects differences were found in the three measures of V02 max (F = 1.89, p = .17) among Black, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, or Asian women, but relative perceived exertion scores were significantly higher for the QCST than for the RW (t = 9.79, p < .001) for all groups. The mean calculated VO2 max for the QCST was 35.90 ml/kg/min for the subset of women ages 18 to 25 and 31.85 for those ages 26 to 46. These values represent a "poor" to "below average" score for aerobic capacity among women in both age groups. Data from this preliminary study suggest that both the RW test and the NE test are comparable to the QCST as valid and reliable field measures of aerobic fitness and appear to be good alternatives to step testing among sedentary individuals.

Key Words: aerobic fitness • exercise testing • step tests • within-subjects factorial design

Biological Research For Nursing, Vol. 8, No. 1, 7-14 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1099800406287864
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Biol Res NursHome page
K. T. D'Alonzo, A. Aluf, L. Vincent, and K. Cooper
A Comparison of Field Methods to Assess Body Composition in a Diverse Group of Sedentary Women
Biol Res Nurs, January 1, 2009; 10(3): 274 - 283.
[Abstract] [PDF]