Effect of protocol on peak power output in continuous incremental cycle exercise tests

Peak power output ([Formula: see text]peak) in an incremental exercise test (EXT) is considered an important predictor of performance for cyclists. However, [Formula: see text]peak is protocol dependent. The purpose of this study was to model the effect of EXT design on [Formula: see text]peak.

An adapted version of a previously developed mathematical model was used. For the purpose of validity testing, we compared predicted [Formula: see text]peak differences (predicted Δ[Formula: see text]peak) with actual Δ[Formula: see text]peak found in sports science literature.

The model quantified Δ[Formula: see text]peak between 36 EXT designs with stage durations in the range 1-5 min and increments in the range 10-50 W. Predicted Δ[Formula: see text]peak and actual Δ[Formula: see text]peak across a wide range of performance levels of cyclists were in good agreement. Depending on the specific combination of increment and stage duration, [Formula: see text]peak may be widely different or equivalent. A minimum difference in increment (5 W) or in stage duration (1 min) already results in significantly different [Formula: see text]peak. In EXTs having the same ratio between increment and stage duration, [Formula: see text]peak in the EXT with the shortest stage duration or the greatest increment is significantly higher. Tests combining 15 W, 25 W or 40 W increments with 2, 3 and 4 min stage durations, respectively, are 'special' in that their [Formula: see text]peak approximates the power output associated with maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]).

The modeling results allow comparison of [Formula: see text]peak between widely different EXT designs. Absolute performance level does not affect Δ[Formula: see text]peak. [Formula: see text]peak15/2, [Formula: see text]peak25/3 and [Formula: see text]peak40/4 constitute a practical physiologic reference for performance diagnostics and exercise intensity prescription.