4.4 Article

A novel approach for measuring energy expenditure of a single sit-to-stand movement

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 116, Issue 5, Pages 997-1004

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-016-3355-5

Keywords

Sedentary behavior; Stand up; Energy expenditure; Obesity; Home exercise

Funding

  1. Fukuoka University Institute for physical activity via the Central Research Institute of Fukuoka University [136009]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25242065] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to quantify the energy expenditure (EE) of a sit-to-stand (STS) movement using a recently developed method and to examine the relationship between physical characteristics and the physiological demands of STS. Nineteen participants completed a multi-stage test at different STS frequencies of 6, 10, 15, 20 and 30 repetitions per minute. The expired gas, heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured. The relationship between EE and STS frequency was obtained and the slope of the regression was quantified as the EE of an STS. The gross EE and HR increased linearly as the STS frequency increased in all participants. The net EE of an STS was 0.92 +/- A 0.37 kJ. The EE of an STS increased as the height and weight increased, and these relationships were well fit by quadratic regression. The metabolic equivalent (Met) of performing 15 STSs per minute was 4.3 +/- A 1.0 Mets and RPE was 12 +/- A 1 over a total of 20. This study demonstrated that the EE of an instantaneous movement can be quantified by relating the gross EE and different frequencies of movement. Using this method, we quantified the EE of an STS, which varied depending on participants' anthropometrics. Mets of repetitive STS movement ranged from 2.6 to 7.2. This physiological profile is useful when performing repetitive STS movements as a form of exercise.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available