Evaluation of methods to quantify aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions during sports and exercise — a systematic review and best-evidence synthesis
Loading...
Date
Publisher
Frontiers
Abstract
Introduction: Energy metabolism during sports and exercise involves both aerobic
and anaerobic pathways, with anaerobic contribution playing a key role in various
decisive moments during competition. However, unlike the aerobic contribution,
quantifying the anaerobic contribution remains challenging due to the lack of a
gold standard. This review aims to systematically assess the reliability and validity
of different methods to quantify the aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions
during sports and exercise, thereby clarifying the level of evidence supporting
each method.
Methods: The search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, including
the databases PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and BISp-surf on June
11, 2024. Studies quantifying and evaluating the aerobic-anaerobic energy
contributions during sports and exercise in humans without diseases, injuries, or
disabilities were deemed eligible. Methodological quality was assessed using the
COSMIN checklist rating reliability, measurement error, and validity, whereby the
overall score was determined using the worst-score-count method. A bestevidence
synthesis was also performed to define the direction and level of evidence.
Results: Of the 2,120 studies identified, 34 met the eligibility criteria. Overall, five
different methods to quantify aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions during
sports and exercise were identified: (i) maximal accumulated oxygen deficit
(MAOD), (ii) PCr-La-O2, (iii) critical power (CP), (iv) gross efficiency (GE), and
(v) the bioenergetic model. Regarding their reliability and validity, the bestevidence
synthesis demonstrated that evidence was strong for MAOD and
limited to strong for CP and PCr-La-O2, and limited to conflicting for GE and
the bioenergetic model. Additionally, the validation studies revealed, that the
methods differ in terms of their applicability and precision to quantify the
anaerobic alactic and lactic contribution.
Discussion: To quantify the aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions during
sports and exercise, the MAOD emerged as the most evaluated method and
the only one with strong evidence for both reliability and validity. However, as
the PCr-La-O2 method is the only approach that can distinguish between
anaerobic alactic and lactic contributions using direct physiological measures,
it should be further evaluated.
Metadata
License
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 International