Increased physiologic intensity during walking and running on a non-motorized, curved treadmill

Smoliga, James M.; Hegedus, Eric J.; Ford, Kevin R.

doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2014.09.001

Cited by 21 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These values were even higher than the producer of the NMCT advertises with: "burning up to 30% more calories than on any other treadmill". The findings were comparable with the study of Smoliga et al [22] who also found that it costs more energy to walk and run on an NMCT compared to a motorized treadmill. However, they found even higher energy cost differences, from over 70% more oxygen uptake during walking and 43% during running at 8 km/h.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…The higher difference found between the two modalities can be explained by the fact that the authors did not perform a familiarization session before conducting the test [20]. Furthermore, the subjects in the study of Smoliga et al [22] were a heterogeneous group of healthy recreational active and competitive males and females, which also may affect oxygen uptake results during the task. In addition, it seems that the difference in oxygen uptake between the NMCT and motorized treadmill decreases with increasing velocity [22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the subjects in the study of Smoliga et al [22] were a heterogeneous group of healthy recreational active and competitive males and females, which also may affect oxygen uptake results during the task. In addition, it seems that the difference in oxygen uptake between the NMCT and motorized treadmill decreases with increasing velocity [22]. In our study, a decrease in differences between the modalities was also found (12 km/h: 43%; 14 km/h: 37%; and 16 km/h: 25%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only a few studies have investigated energy expenditure on a curved nonmotorized treadmill [18,22,23]. In the studies of McCarron et al [18] and Stevens et al [23], the subjects had to perform a 5-km trial on an NMCT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the characteristics of the treadmill belt on a non-motorized treadmill require higher power as the speed increases [13], investigating energy costs for graded exercise intensities is necessary. Only Smoliga et al [22] have compared physiological and perceptual responses when walking and running on an NMCT and a motorized treadmill at the same velocities (walking: 1.34 m/s; running: 2.24 m/s), and they found that energy expenditure was higher when walking and running on an NMCT. However, in this study, only two velocities at a low pace (4.8 km/h and 8 km/h) were used, and they were not compared with running on a track.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of perceptual and physiological variables of running on a track, motorized treadmill, and non-motorized curved treadmill at increasing velocity

Wee

Heimburg

Tillaar

2016

AKUT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare perceptual and physiological variables between running on three different modalities -an indoor athletics track, a motorized treadmill, and a non-motorized curved treadmill -for 1000 m at three different velocities. Ten male athletes (age 24±3 years, body mass 69.8±6.91 kg, height 1.80±0.06 m, VO2peak 69.0±6.70 ml/kg/ min) conducted three 1000 m laps at increasing velocity on three different running modalities. The athletes had a 3-minute recovery between each lap, where the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was registered and the blood lactate concentration and heart rate were measured. Oxygen uptake was measured using a portable metabolic analyser. The physiological (oxygen uptake, heart rate, and blood lactate concentration) and perceptual (RPE) variables were higher when running on a non-motorized curved treadmill compared with running on the track or a motorized treadmill. No differences were found between running on a motorized treadmill and the track except for the RPE, which was lower when running on the track compared with the motorized treadmill. Running on a non-motorized curved treadmill at three different velocities results in a higher oxygen uptake (37%) and heart rate (22%) and is subjectively much harder than running on a track or a motorized treadmill at the same velocities. The difference is around 4 km/h when comparing the physiological and perceptual responses. Thus, when performing training sessions on a non-motorized curved treadmill, subjects should subtract 4 km/h from their regular pace on a track or motorized treadmill to get

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%