Validity and Reproducibility of the Ergomo®Pro Power Meter Compared With the SRM and Powertap Power Meters

Abstract

Purpose:The Ergomo®Pro (EP) is a power meter that measures power output (PO) during outdoor and indoor cycling via 2 optoelectronic sensors located in the bottom bracket axis. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and the reproducibility of the EP compared with the SRM crank set and Powertap hub (PT).Method:The validity of the EP was tested in the laboratory during 8 submaximal incremental tests (PO: 100 to 400 W), eight 30-min submaximal constant-power tests (PO = 180 W), and 8 sprint tests (PO > 750 W) and in the field during 8 training sessions (time: 181 ± 73 min; PO: ~140 to 150 W). The reproducibility was assessed by calculating the coefficient of PO variation (CV) during the submaximal incremental and constant tests.Results:The EP provided a significantly higher PO than the SRM and PT during the submaximal incremental test: The mean PO differences were +6.3% ± 2.5% and +11.1% ± 2.1%, respectively. The difference was greater during field training sessions (+12.0% ± 5.7% and +16.5% ± 5.9%) but lower during sprint tests (+1.6% ± 2.5% and +3.2% ± 2.7%). The reproducibility of the EP is lower than those of the SRM and PT (CV = 4.1% ± 1.8%, 1.9% ± 0.4%, and 2.1% ± 0.8%, respectively).Conclusions:The EP power meter appears less valid and reliable than the SRM and PT systems.

Original characteristics of a new cycle ergometer

“…The low value of CV (1.4 ± 0.5%) indicates that the PO ERGO is reliable. This CV was similar (2%) to the SRM powermeter [6,8]. The reliability of the measurement is one of the major qualities of an ergometer.…”

Validity and Reproducibility of the Garmin Vector Power Meter When Compared to the SRM Device

“…For the purposes of comparison to previous literature, the validity and the reliability of the VPM ergometer was tested using protocols derived from those used in previous studies [1,2,6]. Through four different tests, we compared PO VPM and PO SRM using different gear ratios, outputs of power, pedaling cadences, and posture to test validity, while repeating the three lab tests 10 times and conducting one field test to demonstrate reproducibility.…”

“…Over the course of the 18 intervals, 6 different cadences were used (47, 60, 75, 80, 100, and 123 RPM). These POs and cadences were used to cover a broad spectrum and to allow for comparisons to previous literature [1,2,6]. All 18 trials were performed in the seated position; however, the subject also performed one standing trial with a PO of 160 W in 39/19 to determine the effect of pedaling posture on PO.…”

“…Some power meters have previously been studied to test their validity and reproducibility [1,2]. However with the high number of power meters on the market, many have yet to be tested.…”

Vo2requirement at different displayed power outputs on five cycle ergometer models: a preliminary study

“…These results differ from the study of Bertucci et al 13 showing that PowerTap device is a valid and reliable mobile power meter during submaximal intensities when compared with the scientific SRM model. In recent study, Duc et al 14 found that Ergomo Pro is less valid and reliable when compared with the SRM and PowerTap systems. The Polar S710 measuring device yields PO higher than the SRM system in both field and laboratory conditions 2.…”