Prediction of one-repetition maximum from submaximal ratings of perceived exertion in older adults pre- and post-training
- 336 Downloads
Individual’s one-repetition maximum (1-RM) is required to calculate and prescribe intensity for resistance training, while testing protocols enhance the risk of injuries and are time-consuming.
The aim of the present study was to assess the accuracy of 1-RM prediction from ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) of resistance exercises performed at submaximal sets (intensity and volume) in older adult males before and after a 12-week rehabilitation program.
18 untrained subjects (70.4 ± 4.5 years) first completed a 1-RM direct assessment with a horizontal leg press pre- and post-training. Thereafter, participants performed, in a random order, 2-repetition sets with loads unknown to them (corresponding to 20, 45 and 70 % of 1-RM). The RPE was recorded immediately after the sets. That RPE associated to its corresponding load was subjected to a linear regression analysis to extrapolate the maximal RPE score and its corresponding 1-RM.
RPE and relative intensities of sets appeared related pre- [r 2 = 0.59, standard error of estimate (SEE) = 13.3 %] and post-training (r 2 = 0.83, SEE = 8.1 %). Differences between measured and predicted 1-RM were reduced from the beginning to the end of training but standard deviations remained high (17.4 ± 11.8 vs. 4.2 ± 11.1 kg). Pre-training, 1-RM expressed relatively to body weight was negatively related with the errors of 1-RM predictions (r 2 = 0.39, p = 0.03).
In older subjects, RPE may be used to predict 1-RM; however, the predicted value deviates considerably from the measured one, necessitating cautious application. Importantly, this method allows to capture training-induced change in 1-RM, thus making possible assessing training’s effectiveness and allowing its modification if necessary.
KeywordsStrength training Aging Perceived exertion One-repetition maximum Rehabilitation
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the author.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 11.Knutzen KM, Brilla LR, Caine D (1999) Validity of 1RM prediction equations for older adults. J Strength Cond Res 13:242–246Google Scholar
- 20.Kraemer WJ, Fry AC (1995) Strength testing: development and evaluation of methodology. In: Maud P, Nieman DC (eds) Fitness and sports medicine: A health-related approach. Bull Publishing, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
- 21.Borg G (1998) Perceived exertion and pain scales. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
- 23.Lagally KM, Robertson RJ, Gallagher KI et al (2002) Perceived exertion, electromyography, and blood lactate during acute bouts of resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:552–559 (discussion 560)Google Scholar