Accuracy and validity of commercially available kayak ergometers

Publication Type:
Journal Article
Citation:
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2017, 12 (9), pp. 1267 - 1270
Issue Date:
2017-10-01
Metrics:
Full metadata record
Files in This Item:
Filename Description Size
ContentServer (2).pdfPublished Version636.88 kB
Adobe PDF
© 2017 Human Kinetics, Inc. Methods: This study compared 3 commercially available ergometers for within-And between-brands difference to a first-principle calibration rig. Results: All ergometers underestimated true mean power, with errors of 27.6% ± 3.7%, 4.5% ± 3.5%, and 22.5% ± 1.9% for the KayakPro, WEBA, and Dansprint, respectively. Within-brand ergometer power differences ranged from 17 ± 9 to 22 ± 11 W for the KayakPro, 3 ± 4 to 4 ± 4 W for the WEBA, and 5 ± 3 to 5 ± 4 W for the Dansprint. The linear-regression analysis showed that most kayak ergometers have a stable coefficient of variation (0.9-1.7%) with a moderate effect size. Conclusion: Taken collectively, these findings show that different ergometers present inconsistent outcomes. Therefore, we suggest that athlete testing be conducted on the same ergometer brand, preferably the same ergometer. Optimally, that ergometer should be calibrated using a first-principle device before any athlete testing block.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: