Correlation of Various Heart Rate Measures and Borg CR10 Ratings within the First Five Minutes of Moderate- and Vigorous-Intensity Exercise
Select poster to enlarge.
20 Comments on “Correlation of Various Heart Rate Measures and Borg CR10 Ratings within the First Five Minutes of Moderate- and Vigorous-Intensity Exercise”
SYDNEY GUSTAF (4 days ago): Nice job on your research project as well as your clean and concise poster. Similar to Ashley’s question, do you feel that your results would have been different if you explained/used a Borg RPE scale (RPE)?
MADDISON HAJEK reply (2 days ago): Hi Sydney, thank you for the question! We did explain our RPE scale (the Borg CR10 scale) to each participant prior to having them perform the exercise bouts. There was standardized terminology that we used for our explanation that was kept consistent between participants. In general, it seemed that participants had a good understanding of the scale and its procedural use during the exercise bouts, for one only participant had inverted the scale in which her data had to be excluded for analysis Our scale was very similar to the modified Borg scale the common 0-10
scale, with the only difference of a 0.5 rating between 0 and 1. I do not believe the use of the modified Borg scale would have influenced our results because of the close similarity. However, if we were to use the traditional Borg scale, the 6-20 scale, I anticipate there may have been some changes to our results since this scale may harder to interpret for participants since it does not start at 0 and there are 2-3 numbers for several category descriptions (i.e., both 13 and 14 for ‘somewhat hard’). The reason we chose the Borg CR10 scale was because of the strong research behind it along with the ability to more readily analyze and compare data, which I believe worked out for us. I hope this answers your question!
Great job on your presentation! I think this research can be very beneficial for both clinicians and patients. I found it very interesting that there was a stronger correlation with more vigorous intensity compared to moderate intensity. Do you guys think that the results would be different if the environment or equipment was changed?
Thank you for your question, Daniel! It is likely that there would be some variations in the correlations between HR and RPE if different equipment were used. We used the same physiocycle and intensity settings for all of the participants. Using a different cycle, such as a NuStep, elliptical, etc., may have different intensities and mechanics necessary to carry out the exercise, which may result in more variances of HR and RPE. There would definitely be greater variability had we had a different environment. Had we held this study in a more demographically diverse community, rather than just the USD college campus that is comprised mostly of young, healthy, and active adults, there would likely be more older adults and middle aged participants to help make our data more generalizable. The environment/convenient sample that was used in our study was one of our limitations. It would be interesting to do the same study using a more diverse demographic as well as on different types of exercise equipment to see the variability of RPE reports.
ASHLEY MELDRUM (5 days ago): Nice job concisely presenting your research. I was wondering if you had a theory based on your literature review for why there was a weak correlation for moderate intensity and heart rate as well as why there was a strong correlation for vigorous intensity and HR?
MAIA GABRIELSON reply (5 days ago): Hi Ashley! Thank you for your question. Our team discussed this topic after looking at our research results. We theorized that there may be a limitation with familiarity of testing procedure leading to these results. Each participant underwent the exact same procedure for testing. Thus, the participants were first exercised to moderate intensity and then exercised to vigorous intensity. Therefore, there is the possibility of the participant becoming more familiar with the Borg CR10 which could improve their ability to rate their RPE during the second bout of exercise. For future research, we advised that exercising to moderate or vigorous intensity should be randomized in order to control for this limitation to better assess correlation of the Borg CR10 to various heart rate measures during different exercise intensities. I hope this answered your question!
Great job on your poster! I found it very easy to understand when reading. It is interesting to me that there is a weak correlation when exercising to moderate intensity, but a strong correlation when exercising to vigorous intensity. Do you think the results would have been different if you studied a different population, such as older adults? If so, how do you think these results would differ?
Hello Robyn, great question! Like you stated, our sample population was comprised of young, college aged adults. Our inclusion criteria included all individuals above the ages of 18, but due to convenience and possibly the location where the data was collected, only college aged adults willingly participated in our research study. We hypothesized that due to the increased presence of co-morbidities in older adults that often require the use of medications, especially beta-blockers, the ability to gage true exertion from perceived exertion may be impaired and would result in a weaker correlation. Therefore, the results of our study cannot be generalized to other populations and future research with a wider age range sample population is necessary.
A clear and concise presentation, nice job. Was the weekly physical activity of the participant taken into consideration during the PAR-Q/Screening process? It would be interesting to know if correlation differences would exist if looking at a participants who regularly exercise vs participants who do not frequently exercise. Overall, good job.
Great question, Nick! Each participant was given the PAR-Q to complete in order to identify potential health and lifestyle issues before undergoing aerobic exercise for the study. Vitals were also assessed to help determine if participants were appropriate for our study or not. During the screening process we did not take into account one’s weekly physical activity level. The mean age of our participants was 23.3 years and most happened to be physical therapy students who engage in physical activity often. This serves as a limitation to our study and future studies may investigate correlational differences across the lifespan and health status. For instance, a varied subject selection may provide a better understanding of differences in correlation of RPE and HR between an active and sedentary population.
– Great poster! Being as though no direct correlations between HR and RPE were found within this study, is there anything that you would try differently with hopes of seeing more of a correlation if you were to conduct the study again?
Hi Tori! Thank you for taking time to look at our research poster. As you noted, direct correlations should not be assumed between HR and RPE as they varied over time in our study. Future studies may investigate the correlation of HR and RPE over longer bouts of exercise as we only analyzed data within the first 5 minutes of moderate and vigorous intensity exercise. Future research may also look at correlations when a ramp-up period and steady state exercise are included in the protocol. Additionally, future studies may analyze correlations when the participants vary more in age and health status. These are our suggestions for future research and it would be interesting to see what the correlations look like between HR and RPE if these are taken into consideration. I hope this answers your question!
Great job with this presentation! Since you guys found no direct correlation between RPE and HR, while using the physiocycle. Do you guys think utilizing different tools while assessing for moderate to vigorous intensities would yield a different result? Such as an incline running or a ramp-up walk which progresses to biking at a sustained 11 mph.
Hello Kino! I think you make a great point that utilizing different exercise equipment such as a treadmill could potentially lead to different results. I think this question could also lead us into considering how familiarity with the equipment could ultimately affect the correlation between HR and RPE. For example, one individual who used the physiocycle in our protocol may enjoy biking and do it regularly, therefore they are familiar with how their body will respond. On the other hand, we could have an individual that prefers running on a treadmill and very rarely use a stationary bike which may lead them to gauge their exercise intensity with decreased accuracy in comparison to if they were running. We could also have a subject who prefers strength training over any cardio equipment which decreases familiarity with the exercise even further and may alter one’s ability to gauge exercise intensity. In my opinion I think having familiarity with a certain form of exercise/exercise equipment would result in a stronger correlation between RPE and HR. However, I believe future research is needed to examine correlation of subjective exercise exertion levels to objective HR measures using different equipment/protocols in order to determine if personal preference or familiarity affects the results. Thanks!
Great presentation! Do you believe that somebody’s physical fitness or activity preference would affect this?In this instance, maybe somebody who bikes everyday would report a lower RPE then even somebody who runs or lifts weight everyday? Thanks!
Hi Justin, great question! I do indeed believe that an individual’s physical fitness level or activity preference would affect the results of our study. We did not ask our participants what type of physical activity they were or were not performing, thus this wasn’t a variable we could assess. However, if I was to make an educated guess, I would think that individuals with more experience and activity preference of cycling would likely have different RPE values, likely lower ratings, than an individual who is less experienced in this form of exercise. Similarly, I believe individuals of higher fitness would be more attuned to their body and give more reliable RPE values than an individual who is less active and familiar with their body’s response to exercise. These are both great future research ideas!
Great presentation! Do you guys think a stronger correlation would be found with a patient who is previously familiar with the RPE scale compared to a patient who was taught it on day 1? If so, do you think splitting participants with prior knowledge and no knowledge on the scale into groups would show different correlations in RPE and HR?
Hi Tom! Thank you for your questions. This is something our group hypothesized. It seems logical that someone who is more familiar with the RPE scale prior to the study would be able to more accurately report on their exertion compared to someone learning it day 1. We did not ask participants specifically on their familiarity with the RPE scale, but that would be interesting for a future study to take into account prior knowledge! Another aspect our group discussed was splitting people in groups of those who exercise often compared to those who do not and assess their accuracy with RPE. Studies have shown that RPE can be affected when people are familiar with the exercise and knowing how much longer the exercise will last! Hope that answers your question. Thanks!
Hi guys great job on your poster! I thought that your poster was very concise and easy to read and understand! My question is what would you hypothesize the results to be if the population had been focused on a geriatric population rather than a college population? Great job again!
Hi Jacob, thank you for your compliments! Great question. I think this would largely depend on specifically the type of subpopulation within the overall geriatric population. For example, are we talking about senior athletes who are very familiar with fitness or sedentary individuals who have little to no experience with exercising? I believe it would depend more on the individual’s background with exercise and their familiarity with their body’s response to activity rather than the actual population itself. With that being said, if we are considering the larger geriatric population who tends to be less physically active with increased health issues and comorbidities, I hypothesize there would be weaker correlation between RPE values and HR during both moderate and vigorous exercise. In addition, I think it would be important to consider the cognitive level of the participants, for it is important the RPE scale and procedures of the study are well understood in order to produce the most accurate results. Since cognitive impairments are more common in the geriatric population, this may also impact the findings between RPE and HR, resulting in potentially weaker (or stronger, depending on understanding) correlations. I hope this answers your question!
Great poster! One question I had was why the level 3 then level 4 resistance at 11 mph was chosen? Was there some sort of previous research that suggested these were good parameters?
Amanda, thank you for your question! There was no research that we found about this particular physiocycle that stated we should use those specific parameters to achieve our intensity goals during our study. Level 3 seemed to be a generalizable level that a participant could achieve a moderate level of intensity. Since vigorous intensity is just one level above moderate intensity, it seemed appropriate to then test our participants just a level above that, at level 4. Asking the participants to then maintain a speed of 11 mph was just another parameter chosen by us to help keep our findings consistent throughout our study.
USD PT Research 
SYDNEY GUSTAF (4 days ago): Nice job on your research project as well as your clean and concise poster. Similar to Ashley’s question, do you feel that your results would have been different if you explained/used a Borg RPE scale (RPE)?
MADDISON HAJEK reply (2 days ago): Hi Sydney, thank you for the question! We did explain our RPE scale (the Borg CR10 scale) to each participant prior to having them perform the exercise bouts. There was standardized terminology that we used for our explanation that was kept consistent between participants. In general, it seemed that participants had a good understanding of the scale and its procedural use during the exercise bouts, for one only participant had inverted the scale in which her data had to be excluded for analysis Our scale was very similar to the modified Borg scale the common 0-10
scale, with the only difference of a 0.5 rating between 0 and 1. I do not believe the use of the modified Borg scale would have influenced our results because of the close similarity. However, if we were to use the traditional Borg scale, the 6-20 scale, I anticipate there may have been some changes to our results since this scale may harder to interpret for participants since it does not start at 0 and there are 2-3 numbers for several category descriptions (i.e., both 13 and 14 for ‘somewhat hard’). The reason we chose the Borg CR10 scale was because of the strong research behind it along with the ability to more readily analyze and compare data, which I believe worked out for us. I hope this answers your question!
LikeLike
Great job on your presentation! I think this research can be very beneficial for both clinicians and patients. I found it very interesting that there was a stronger correlation with more vigorous intensity compared to moderate intensity. Do you guys think that the results would be different if the environment or equipment was changed?
LikeLike
Thank you for your question, Daniel! It is likely that there would be some variations in the correlations between HR and RPE if different equipment were used. We used the same physiocycle and intensity settings for all of the participants. Using a different cycle, such as a NuStep, elliptical, etc., may have different intensities and mechanics necessary to carry out the exercise, which may result in more variances of HR and RPE. There would definitely be greater variability had we had a different environment. Had we held this study in a more demographically diverse community, rather than just the USD college campus that is comprised mostly of young, healthy, and active adults, there would likely be more older adults and middle aged participants to help make our data more generalizable. The environment/convenient sample that was used in our study was one of our limitations. It would be interesting to do the same study using a more diverse demographic as well as on different types of exercise equipment to see the variability of RPE reports.
LikeLike
ASHLEY MELDRUM (5 days ago): Nice job concisely presenting your research. I was wondering if you had a theory based on your literature review for why there was a weak correlation for moderate intensity and heart rate as well as why there was a strong correlation for vigorous intensity and HR?
MAIA GABRIELSON reply (5 days ago): Hi Ashley! Thank you for your question. Our team discussed this topic after looking at our research results. We theorized that there may be a limitation with familiarity of testing procedure leading to these results. Each participant underwent the exact same procedure for testing. Thus, the participants were first exercised to moderate intensity and then exercised to vigorous intensity. Therefore, there is the possibility of the participant becoming more familiar with the Borg CR10 which could improve their ability to rate their RPE during the second bout of exercise. For future research, we advised that exercising to moderate or vigorous intensity should be randomized in order to control for this limitation to better assess correlation of the Borg CR10 to various heart rate measures during different exercise intensities. I hope this answered your question!
LikeLike
Great job on your poster! I found it very easy to understand when reading. It is interesting to me that there is a weak correlation when exercising to moderate intensity, but a strong correlation when exercising to vigorous intensity. Do you think the results would have been different if you studied a different population, such as older adults? If so, how do you think these results would differ?
LikeLike
Hello Robyn, great question! Like you stated, our sample population was comprised of young, college aged adults. Our inclusion criteria included all individuals above the ages of 18, but due to convenience and possibly the location where the data was collected, only college aged adults willingly participated in our research study. We hypothesized that due to the increased presence of co-morbidities in older adults that often require the use of medications, especially beta-blockers, the ability to gage true exertion from perceived exertion may be impaired and would result in a weaker correlation. Therefore, the results of our study cannot be generalized to other populations and future research with a wider age range sample population is necessary.
LikeLike
A clear and concise presentation, nice job. Was the weekly physical activity of the participant taken into consideration during the PAR-Q/Screening process? It would be interesting to know if correlation differences would exist if looking at a participants who regularly exercise vs participants who do not frequently exercise. Overall, good job.
LikeLike
Great question, Nick! Each participant was given the PAR-Q to complete in order to identify potential health and lifestyle issues before undergoing aerobic exercise for the study. Vitals were also assessed to help determine if participants were appropriate for our study or not. During the screening process we did not take into account one’s weekly physical activity level. The mean age of our participants was 23.3 years and most happened to be physical therapy students who engage in physical activity often. This serves as a limitation to our study and future studies may investigate correlational differences across the lifespan and health status. For instance, a varied subject selection may provide a better understanding of differences in correlation of RPE and HR between an active and sedentary population.
LikeLike
– Great poster! Being as though no direct correlations between HR and RPE were found within this study, is there anything that you would try differently with hopes of seeing more of a correlation if you were to conduct the study again?
LikeLike
Hi Tori! Thank you for taking time to look at our research poster. As you noted, direct correlations should not be assumed between HR and RPE as they varied over time in our study. Future studies may investigate the correlation of HR and RPE over longer bouts of exercise as we only analyzed data within the first 5 minutes of moderate and vigorous intensity exercise. Future research may also look at correlations when a ramp-up period and steady state exercise are included in the protocol. Additionally, future studies may analyze correlations when the participants vary more in age and health status. These are our suggestions for future research and it would be interesting to see what the correlations look like between HR and RPE if these are taken into consideration. I hope this answers your question!
LikeLike
Great job with this presentation! Since you guys found no direct correlation between RPE and HR, while using the physiocycle. Do you guys think utilizing different tools while assessing for moderate to vigorous intensities would yield a different result? Such as an incline running or a ramp-up walk which progresses to biking at a sustained 11 mph.
LikeLike
Hello Kino! I think you make a great point that utilizing different exercise equipment such as a treadmill could potentially lead to different results. I think this question could also lead us into considering how familiarity with the equipment could ultimately affect the correlation between HR and RPE. For example, one individual who used the physiocycle in our protocol may enjoy biking and do it regularly, therefore they are familiar with how their body will respond. On the other hand, we could have an individual that prefers running on a treadmill and very rarely use a stationary bike which may lead them to gauge their exercise intensity with decreased accuracy in comparison to if they were running. We could also have a subject who prefers strength training over any cardio equipment which decreases familiarity with the exercise even further and may alter one’s ability to gauge exercise intensity. In my opinion I think having familiarity with a certain form of exercise/exercise equipment would result in a stronger correlation between RPE and HR. However, I believe future research is needed to examine correlation of subjective exercise exertion levels to objective HR measures using different equipment/protocols in order to determine if personal preference or familiarity affects the results. Thanks!
LikeLike
Great presentation! Do you believe that somebody’s physical fitness or activity preference would affect this?In this instance, maybe somebody who bikes everyday would report a lower RPE then even somebody who runs or lifts weight everyday? Thanks!
LikeLike
Hi Justin, great question! I do indeed believe that an individual’s physical fitness level or activity preference would affect the results of our study. We did not ask our participants what type of physical activity they were or were not performing, thus this wasn’t a variable we could assess. However, if I was to make an educated guess, I would think that individuals with more experience and activity preference of cycling would likely have different RPE values, likely lower ratings, than an individual who is less experienced in this form of exercise. Similarly, I believe individuals of higher fitness would be more attuned to their body and give more reliable RPE values than an individual who is less active and familiar with their body’s response to exercise. These are both great future research ideas!
LikeLike
Great presentation! Do you guys think a stronger correlation would be found with a patient who is previously familiar with the RPE scale compared to a patient who was taught it on day 1? If so, do you think splitting participants with prior knowledge and no knowledge on the scale into groups would show different correlations in RPE and HR?
LikeLike
Hi Tom! Thank you for your questions. This is something our group hypothesized. It seems logical that someone who is more familiar with the RPE scale prior to the study would be able to more accurately report on their exertion compared to someone learning it day 1. We did not ask participants specifically on their familiarity with the RPE scale, but that would be interesting for a future study to take into account prior knowledge! Another aspect our group discussed was splitting people in groups of those who exercise often compared to those who do not and assess their accuracy with RPE. Studies have shown that RPE can be affected when people are familiar with the exercise and knowing how much longer the exercise will last! Hope that answers your question. Thanks!
LikeLike
Hi guys great job on your poster! I thought that your poster was very concise and easy to read and understand! My question is what would you hypothesize the results to be if the population had been focused on a geriatric population rather than a college population? Great job again!
LikeLike
Hi Jacob, thank you for your compliments! Great question. I think this would largely depend on specifically the type of subpopulation within the overall geriatric population. For example, are we talking about senior athletes who are very familiar with fitness or sedentary individuals who have little to no experience with exercising? I believe it would depend more on the individual’s background with exercise and their familiarity with their body’s response to activity rather than the actual population itself. With that being said, if we are considering the larger geriatric population who tends to be less physically active with increased health issues and comorbidities, I hypothesize there would be weaker correlation between RPE values and HR during both moderate and vigorous exercise. In addition, I think it would be important to consider the cognitive level of the participants, for it is important the RPE scale and procedures of the study are well understood in order to produce the most accurate results. Since cognitive impairments are more common in the geriatric population, this may also impact the findings between RPE and HR, resulting in potentially weaker (or stronger, depending on understanding) correlations. I hope this answers your question!
LikeLike
Great poster! One question I had was why the level 3 then level 4 resistance at 11 mph was chosen? Was there some sort of previous research that suggested these were good parameters?
LikeLike
Amanda, thank you for your question! There was no research that we found about this particular physiocycle that stated we should use those specific parameters to achieve our intensity goals during our study. Level 3 seemed to be a generalizable level that a participant could achieve a moderate level of intensity. Since vigorous intensity is just one level above moderate intensity, it seemed appropriate to then test our participants just a level above that, at level 4. Asking the participants to then maintain a speed of 11 mph was just another parameter chosen by us to help keep our findings consistent throughout our study.
LikeLike