This study compared the physiological responses (oxygen consumption and energy expenditure) of Nordic Walking to regular walking under field-testing conditions. Eleven women (M age = 27.1 years, SD = 6.4) and 11 men (M age = 33.8 years, SD = 9.0) walked 1,600 m with and without walking poles on a level, 200-m track. For women, Nordic Walking resulted in increased oxygen consumption (M = 14.9 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1), SD = 3.2 vs. M = 1 7.9 ml x kg(-1) min(-1), SD = 3.5; p < .001), caloric expenditure (M = 4.6 kcal x min(-1), SD = 1.2 vs. M = 5.4 kcal x min(-1), SD = 1.2; p < .001), and heart rate (M = 113.7 bpm, SD = 12.0 vs. M = 118.7 bpm, SD = 14.8; p < .05) compared to regular walking. For men, Nordic Walking resulted in increased oxygen consumption (M = 12.8 ml x kg(-1) min(-1), SD = 1.8 vs. M = 15.5, SD =3.4 ml x kg(-1) min(-1); p < .01), caloric expenditure (M = 5.7 kcal x min(-1), SD = 1.3 vs. M = 6.9 kcal x min(-1), SD = 1.8; p < .001), and heart rate (M = 101.6 bpm, SD = 12.0 bpm vs. M = 109.8 bpm, SD = 14.7; p < .01) compared to regular walking. Nordic Walking, examined in the field, results in a significant increase in oxygen use and caloric expenditure compared to regular walking, without significantly increasing perceived exertion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Church et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: