Journal of Applied Physiology Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 38: 794-800, 1975;
8750-7587/75 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lance, V. Q.
Right arrow Articles by Spodick, D. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lance, V. Q.
Right arrow Articles by Spodick, D. H.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 38, Issue 5 794-800, Copyright © 1975 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Constant-load versus heart rate-targeted exercise: responses of systolic intervals

V. Q. Lance and D. H. Spodick

Eight normal male volunteers were studied during bicycle ergometry at constant work loads of 50, 100, and 150 W for 4 min each and heart rate-targeted exercise to rates which matched those during the end of the 4th min at each constant work load. Systolic intervals measured prior to and during exercise included: Q-IM, isovolumic contraction time (IVCT), preejection period (PEP), left ventricular ejection time (LVET), ejection time index (ETI), PEP/LVET, and pulse transmission time (PTT). Directional changes during both exercise methods were consistent with previously reported results. Comparable control values indicated equivalent starting points for each bout and confirmed recovery from preceding exercise. There was striking similarities within each matched exercise set for Q-IM, IVCT, PEP, and PEP/LVET. LVET was significantly shorter for rate targeted exercise. We conclude that either constant-load or rate-targeted bicycle ergometry may be employed with choice of method determined by the purpose of the protocol and that systoloc intervals (except LVET) should not be importantly altered owing to the method chosen.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online