Is the Functional Threshold Power a Valid Surrogate of the Lactate Threshold?

ABACUS/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Valenzuela Ruiz, Pedro Luis
dc.contributor.author Morales Rojas, Javier Salvador
dc.contributor.author Foster, Carl
dc.contributor.author Lucía Mulas, Alejandro
dc.date.accessioned 2019-01-25T15:19:56Z
dc.date.available 2019-01-25T15:19:56Z
dc.date.issued 2018
dc.identifier.citation Valenzuela, P. L., Morales, J. S., Foster, C., Lucia, A., & de la Villa, P. (2018). Is the Functional Threshold Power (FTP) a Valid Surrogate of the Lactate Threshold? International journal of sports physiology and performance, 13(10), 1293-1298. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0008 spa
dc.identifier.issn 1555-0265
dc.identifier.issn 1555-0273
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11268/7744
dc.description.abstract To analyze the relationship between functional threshold power (FTP) and the lactate threshold (LT). Methods: A total of 20 male cyclists performed an incremental test in which LT was determined. At least 48 h later, they performed a 20-min time trial, and 95% of the mean power output was defined as FTP. Participants were divided into recreational (peak power output < 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 11) or trained cyclists (peak power output > 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 9) according to their fitness status. Results: The FTP (240 [35] W) was overall not significantly different (effect size = 0.20; limits of agreement = −2.4% [11.5%]) from the LT (246 [24] W), and both markers were strongly correlated (r = .95; P < .0001). Accounting for the participants’ fitness status, no significant differences were found between FTP and LT (effect size = 0.22; limits of agreement =2.1% [7.8%]) in trained cyclists, but FTP was significantly lower than the LT (P = .0004, effect size = 0.81; limits of agreement =−6.5% [8.3%]) in recreational cyclists. A significant relationship was found between relative peak power output and the bias between FTP and the LT markers (r = .77; P < .0001). Conclusions: FTP is a valid field test-based marker for the assessment of endurance fitness. However, caution should be taken when using FTP interchangeably with LT, as the bias between markers seems to depend on the athlete’s fitness status. Whereas FTP provides a good estimate of LT in trained cyclists, in recreational cyclists, it may underestimate LT. spa
dc.description.sponsorship SIN FINANCIACIÓN spa
dc.language.iso eng spa
dc.title Is the Functional Threshold Power a Valid Surrogate of the Lactate Threshold? spa
dc.type article spa
dc.description.impact 3.384 JCR (2017) Q1, 10/81 Sport Sciences; Q2, 21/83 Physiology spa
dc.identifier.doi 10.1123/ijspp.2018-0008
dc.rights.accessRights closedAccess spa
dc.subject.uem Entrenamiento deportivo spa
dc.subject.uem Efectos fisiológicos spa
dc.subject.unesco Deporte spa
dc.subject.unesco Efectos fisiológicos spa
dc.description.filiation UEM spa
dc.relation.publisherversion http://ezproxy.universidadeuropea.es/login?url=http:/ /dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0008 spa
dc.peerreviewed Si spa

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record