The maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) is deemed the highest predictor for all-cause mortality, and therefore, an ability to assess VO2max is important. The YMCA submaximal test is one of the most widely used tests to estimate VO2max; however, it has questionable validity.
Purpose: We validated a customized submaximal test that accounts for the nonlinear rise in VO2 relative to power output and compared its accuracy against the YMCA protocol.
Methods: Fifty-six men and women performed a graded exercise test with a subsequent exhaustive, square wave bout for the verification of "true" VO2max. In counterbalanced order, subjects then completed the YMCA test and our new Mankato submaximal exercise test (MSET). The MSET consisted of a 3-min stage estimated at 35% VO2max and a second 3-min stage estimated at either 65% or 70% VO2max, where VO2max was estimated with a regression equation using sex, body mass index, age, and self-reported PA-R.
Results: VO2 values from the graded exercise test and square wave verification bout did not differ with the highest value used to identify "true" VO2max (45.1 ± 8.89 mL · kg(-1) · min(-1)). The MSET (43.6 ± 8.6 mL · kg(-1) · min(-1)) did not differ from "true" VO2max, whereas the YMCA test (41.1 ± 9.6 mL · kg(-1) · min(-1)) yielded an underestimation (P = 0.002). The MSET was moderately correlated with "true" VO2max (ICC = 0.73, CV of 11.3%). The YMCA test was poorly correlated with "true" VO2max (ICC = 0.29, CV of 15.1%).
Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine submaximal exercise protocols versus a verified VO2max protocol. The MSET yielded better estimates of VO2max because of the protocol including a stage exceeding gas exchange threshold.