Key result
Time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test delineates all six incremental exercise stages, outperforming the Counting Talk Test.
Why the study?
Because the Talk Test is a non-standardized assessment for exercise intensity estimation, the study aimed to compare a time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test with a self-paced Counting Talk Test across incremental exercise stages.
Does a time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test improve exercise intensity estimation compared to a Counting Talk Test during incremental cardiorespiratory exercise?
Cross-Sectional (n=24)
No
Does a time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test improve exercise intensity estimation compared to a Counting Talk Test during incremental cardiorespiratory exercise?
p-value: p=≤0.017
The time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test may be more universally applicable for detecting light, moderate, and vigorous exercise intensity compared to the Counting Talk Test.
May support monosyllabic Talk Test for exercise intensity staging; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Purpose: When utilizing breathing for speech, the rate and volume of inhalation, as well as the rate of exhalation during the utterance, seem to be largely governed by the speech-controlling system and its requirements with respect to phrasing, loudness, and articulation. However, since the Talk Test represents a non-standardized form of assessment of exercise intensity estimation, this study aimed to compare the utterance rate and the estimated exercise intensity using a newly introduced time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test (tMTT) versus a self-paced Counting Talk Test (CTT) across incremental exercise stages and examined their associations with the exercise physiological measures. Methods: Twenty-four participants, 10 males and 14 females (25 ± 4.0 yr; 160 ± 10 cm; 62 ± 14.5 kg) performed two sessions of submaximal cardiorespiratory exercise at incremental heart rate reserve (HRR) stages ranging from 40 to 85% of HRR: one session was performed with a currently available CTT that was affixed to a wall in front of the participants, and the other session was conducted with a tMTT with a 1-s inter-stimulus interval that was displayed from a tablet. In each session, the participants performed six stages of exercise at 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 85% HRR on a treadmill and were also asked to rate their perceived exertion based on Borg's 6 to 20 Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) at each exercise stage. Results: ≤ 0.017), while CTT could only delineate exercise stages at 60, 80, and 85% HRR. However, in estimations of exercise intensity, the tMTT demonstrated only moderate associations with HRR and Borg's RPE, similarly to the CTT. Conclusion: If the purpose of exercise monitoring is to detect the intensity of light, moderate, and vigorous exercise intensity, the tMTT could be more universally applicable. However, due to its larger variability of speech rate across exercise intensities, the time-regulated approach may alter the speech breathing characteristics of the exercising individuals in other ways that should be investigated in future research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahmod et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy adults (n=24). Time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test (tMTT) vs. Self-paced Counting Talk Test (CTT) was evaluated on Delineation of incremental exercise stages (p=≤0.017). The time-controlled monosyllabic Talk Test significantly delineated all six stages of incremental exercise (p≤0.017), whereas the Counting Talk Test only delineated stages at 60, 80, and 85% HRR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: