The HRmax = 208 - (0.7 * age) equation was the most accurate predictor of HRmax, while measured HRmax was higher in males (198.3 vs 190.4 bpm) and sedentary subjects (197.3 vs 191.4 bpm).
Cross-Sectional (n=52)
Does the equation HRmax = 208 - (0.7 * age) improve the accuracy of maximal heart rate prediction compared to traditional equations in young adults?
The equation HRmax = 208 - (0.7 * age) is more accurate than 220-age and 226-age for predicting maximal heart rate in healthy 18-25 year olds.
Absolute Event Rate: 198.3% vs 190.4%
p-value: p=<.001
International Journal of Exercise Science 8(4): 318-330, 2015. The purpose of the study was to determine if measured maximal heart rate (HRmax) was affected by sex or aerobic training status, and to determine the accuracy of three common clinical age-prediction maximal heart rate regression equations used to predict HRmax: HRmax = 220 – age, HRmax = 226 – age, and HRmax = 208 – (0.7 ∙ age). Fifty-two participants in total, 30 of which were in the active group (15 M, 15 F) and 22 subjects in the sedentary group (9 M, 13 F), within the age range of 18-25 years and with a normal BMI (18.5-24.9 kg∙m-2) underwent a Bruce maximal treadmill exercise protocol. The effect of sex and training status on HRmax was analyzed through a two-way ANOVA, and the effect of sex, aerobic training status, and regression equation on accuracy of the HRmax prediction was assessed with a three-way ANOVA (α=0.05). Overall, males had a higher HRmax than females (198.3 v. 190.4 beats • min-1 , p<.001) and sedentary individuals had higher measured HRmax than active individuals (197.3 v. 191.4 beats • min-1, p=.002). Furthermore, HRmax = 208 – (0.7 ∙ age)(equation 3) calculated the smallest signed and unsigned residuals from the difference between observed HRmax and predicted HRmax values for the significant main effects of equation (3), equation x sex (females x 3), and equation x activity level (active x 3). Therefore, based on our results, we conclude that HRmax = 208 – (0.7 ∙ age) has greater accuracy than the other two equations studied for predicting observed values of HRmax in 18-25 year olds.
Roy et al. (Thu,) reported a cross-sectional. HRmax = 208 - (0.7 * age) equation vs. HRmax = 220 - age and HRmax = 226 - age equations was evaluated on Measured maximal heart rate (HRmax) by sex (p=<.001). The HRmax = 208 - (0.7 * age) equation was the most accurate predictor of HRmax, while measured HRmax was higher in males (198.3 vs 190.4 bpm) and sedentary subjects (197.3 vs 191.4 bpm).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: