The Reliability and Validity of the PowerTap P1 Power Pedals Before and After 100 Hours of Use

James Wright, Thomas Walker, Scott Burnet, Simon Jobson

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

Abstract

Purpose: The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate agreement between the PowerTap P1 (P1) pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport cycle ergometer, 2) investigate the reliability of the P1 pedals between repeated testing sessions, and 3) compare the reliability and validity of the P1 pedals before (P10) and after (P1100) ~100 h of use. Methods: Ten participants completed four 5-min sub-maximal cycling bouts (100, 150, 200 and 250 W), a 2-min time-trial and two 10-s all-out sprints on two occasions. The above protocol was repeated after fifteen months and ~100 h of use. Results: Significant differences were seen between the P10 pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.006), 150 W (P = 0.006), 200 W (P = 0.001) and 250 W (P = 0.006) and during the all-out sprints (P = 0.020). Following ~100 h of use, the P1100 pedals did not significantly differ from the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.799), 150 W (P = 0.183), 200 W (P = 0.289) and 250 W (P = 0.183), during the 2-min time-trial (P = 0.583) or during the all-out sprints (P = 0.412). The coefficient of variation for the P10 and P1100 ranged from 0.6–1.3% and 0.5–2.0%, respectively, during the sub-maximal cycling bouts. Conclusion: The P1 pedals provide valid data after ~100 h of laboratory use. Furthermore, the pedals provide reliable data during sub-maximal cycling, even after prolonged use.
Original languageEnglish
Specialist publicationInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 26 Dec 2018

Fingerprint

Reproducibility of Results
Foot
Sports

Cite this

@misc{e7f804afb59c452a9121bc9dcab746ef,
title = "The Reliability and Validity of the PowerTap P1 Power Pedals Before and After 100 Hours of Use",
abstract = "Purpose: The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate agreement between the PowerTap P1 (P1) pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport cycle ergometer, 2) investigate the reliability of the P1 pedals between repeated testing sessions, and 3) compare the reliability and validity of the P1 pedals before (P10) and after (P1100) ~100 h of use. Methods: Ten participants completed four 5-min sub-maximal cycling bouts (100, 150, 200 and 250 W), a 2-min time-trial and two 10-s all-out sprints on two occasions. The above protocol was repeated after fifteen months and ~100 h of use. Results: Significant differences were seen between the P10 pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.006), 150 W (P = 0.006), 200 W (P = 0.001) and 250 W (P = 0.006) and during the all-out sprints (P = 0.020). Following ~100 h of use, the P1100 pedals did not significantly differ from the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.799), 150 W (P = 0.183), 200 W (P = 0.289) and 250 W (P = 0.183), during the 2-min time-trial (P = 0.583) or during the all-out sprints (P = 0.412). The coefficient of variation for the P10 and P1100 ranged from 0.6–1.3{\%} and 0.5–2.0{\%}, respectively, during the sub-maximal cycling bouts. Conclusion: The P1 pedals provide valid data after ~100 h of laboratory use. Furthermore, the pedals provide reliable data during sub-maximal cycling, even after prolonged use.",
author = "James Wright and Thomas Walker and Scott Burnet and Simon Jobson",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "26",
language = "English",
journal = "International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance",
issn = "1555-0265",
publisher = "Human Kinetics Publishers Inc.",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - The Reliability and Validity of the PowerTap P1 Power Pedals Before and After 100 Hours of Use

AU - Wright, James

AU - Walker, Thomas

AU - Burnet, Scott

AU - Jobson, Simon

PY - 2018/12/26

Y1 - 2018/12/26

N2 - Purpose: The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate agreement between the PowerTap P1 (P1) pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport cycle ergometer, 2) investigate the reliability of the P1 pedals between repeated testing sessions, and 3) compare the reliability and validity of the P1 pedals before (P10) and after (P1100) ~100 h of use. Methods: Ten participants completed four 5-min sub-maximal cycling bouts (100, 150, 200 and 250 W), a 2-min time-trial and two 10-s all-out sprints on two occasions. The above protocol was repeated after fifteen months and ~100 h of use. Results: Significant differences were seen between the P10 pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.006), 150 W (P = 0.006), 200 W (P = 0.001) and 250 W (P = 0.006) and during the all-out sprints (P = 0.020). Following ~100 h of use, the P1100 pedals did not significantly differ from the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.799), 150 W (P = 0.183), 200 W (P = 0.289) and 250 W (P = 0.183), during the 2-min time-trial (P = 0.583) or during the all-out sprints (P = 0.412). The coefficient of variation for the P10 and P1100 ranged from 0.6–1.3% and 0.5–2.0%, respectively, during the sub-maximal cycling bouts. Conclusion: The P1 pedals provide valid data after ~100 h of laboratory use. Furthermore, the pedals provide reliable data during sub-maximal cycling, even after prolonged use.

AB - Purpose: The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate agreement between the PowerTap P1 (P1) pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport cycle ergometer, 2) investigate the reliability of the P1 pedals between repeated testing sessions, and 3) compare the reliability and validity of the P1 pedals before (P10) and after (P1100) ~100 h of use. Methods: Ten participants completed four 5-min sub-maximal cycling bouts (100, 150, 200 and 250 W), a 2-min time-trial and two 10-s all-out sprints on two occasions. The above protocol was repeated after fifteen months and ~100 h of use. Results: Significant differences were seen between the P10 pedals and the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.006), 150 W (P = 0.006), 200 W (P = 0.001) and 250 W (P = 0.006) and during the all-out sprints (P = 0.020). Following ~100 h of use, the P1100 pedals did not significantly differ from the Lode Excalibur Sport at 100 W (P = 0.799), 150 W (P = 0.183), 200 W (P = 0.289) and 250 W (P = 0.183), during the 2-min time-trial (P = 0.583) or during the all-out sprints (P = 0.412). The coefficient of variation for the P10 and P1100 ranged from 0.6–1.3% and 0.5–2.0%, respectively, during the sub-maximal cycling bouts. Conclusion: The P1 pedals provide valid data after ~100 h of laboratory use. Furthermore, the pedals provide reliable data during sub-maximal cycling, even after prolonged use.

M3 - Article

JO - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

JF - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

SN - 1555-0265

ER -