Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2019; 40(09): 609-613
DOI: 10.1055/a-0946-2159
Orthopedics & Biomechanics
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

How Does Power During Running Change when Measured at Different Time Intervals?

Felipe García-Pinillos
1   Department of Physical Education, Sports and Recreation, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile
,
Víctor M. Soto-Hermoso
2   Sport and Physical Education, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain
,
Pedro Á. Latorre-Román
3   Department of Didactics of Music, Plastic and Corporal Expression, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain
,
Juan A. Párraga-Montilla
4   Physical Activity and Sports Science, University of Jaen, Jaen, Spain
,
Luis E. Roche-Seruendo
5   Universidad San Jorge Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Health Sciences, Villanueva de Gallego, Spain
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted 29 May 2019

Publication Date:
11 July 2019 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study aimed to examine how the power output changes while running at a continuous comfortable velocity on a motorized treadmill by comparing running power averaged during different time intervals. Forty-nine endurance runners performed a running protocol on a treadmill at self-selected comfortable velocity. Power output (W) was estimated with the Stryd™ power meter, and it was examined over six recording intervals within the 3-min recording period: 0–10 s, 0–20 s, 0–30 s, 0–60 s, 0–120 s and 0–180 s. The ANOVAs showed no significant differences in the magnitude of the power output between the recording intervals (p=0.276, F=1.614, partial Eta 2 =0.155). An almost perfect association was also observed in the magnitude of the power output between the recording intervals (ICC≥0.999). Bland-Altman plots revealed no heteroscedasticity of error for the power output in any of the between-intervals comparisons (r 2<0.1), although longer recording intervals yield smaller systematic bias, random errors, and narrower limits of agreement for power output. The results show that power data during running, as measured through the Stryd™ system, is a stable metric with negligible differences, in practical terms, between shorter (i. e., 10, 20, 30, 60 or 120 s) and longer recording intervals (i. e., 180 s).

Key words

endurance - foot pod - kinetics - runners
 

  • References

  • 1 Passfield L, Hopker J, Jobson S, Friel D, Zabala M. Knowledge is power: Issues of measuring training and performance in cycling. J Sports Sci 2017; 35: 1426-1434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 García-Pinillos F, Latorre-Román PÁ, Roche-Seruendo LE, García-Ramos A. Prediction of power output at different running velocities through the two-point method with the StrydTM power meter. Gait Posture 2019; 68: 238-243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Aubry RL, Power GA, Burr JF. An assessment of running power as a training metric for elite and recreational runners. J Strength Cond Res 2018; 32: 2258-2264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Austin C, Hokanson J, McGinnis P, Patrick S. The relationship between running power and running economy in well-trained distance runners. Sports (Basel) 2018; 6: E142
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Burnley M, Jones AM. Power-duration relationship: Physiology, fatigue, and the limits of human performance. Eur J Sport Sci 2018; 18: 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Harriss D, Macsween A, Atkinson G. Standards for ethics in sport and exercise science research: 2018 update. Int J Sports Med 2017; 38: 1126-1131
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Schieb DA. Kinematic accommodation of novice treadmill runners. Res Q Exerc Sport 1986; 57: 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lavcanska V, Taylor NF, Schache AG. Familiarization to treadmill running in young unimpaired adults. Hum Mov Sci 2005; 24: 544-557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 García-Pinillos F, Roche-Seruendo LE, Marcen-Cinca N, Marco-Contreras LA, Latorre-Román PA. Absolute reliability and concurrent validity of the Stryd system for the assessment of running stride kinematics at different velocities. J Strength Cond Res 2018; DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002595.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016; 15: 155-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: Why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 1995; 346: 1085-1087
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (Reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sport Med 1998; 26: 217-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Riley PO, Dicharry J, Franz J, Della Croce U, Wilder RP, Kerrigan DC. A kinematics and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008; 40: 1093-1100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Firminger CR, Vernillo G, Savoldelli A, Stefanyshyn DJ, Millet GY, Edwards WB. Joint kinematics and ground reaction forces in overground vs. treadmill graded running. Gait Posture 2018; 63: 109-113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rozumalski A, Novacheck TF, Griffith CJ, Walt K, Schwartz MH. Treadmill vs. overground running gait during childhood: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. Gait Posture 2015; 41: 613-618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Nakayama Y, Kudo K, Ohtsuki T. Variability and fluctuation in running gait cycle of trained runners and non-runners. Gait Posture 2010; 31: 331-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Di Michele R, Merni F. The concurrent effects of strike pattern and ground-contact time on running economy. J Sci Med Sport 2014; 17: 414-418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar