Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) is an important health indicator that is often estimated using a multiple regression model (MRM) or linear extrapolation method (LEM) with the heart rate (HR) during a step test. Nonetheless, both methods have inherent problems. This study investigated a VO2max estimation method that mitigates the weaknesses of these two methods. A total of 128 adults completed anthropometric measurements, a physical activity questionnaire, a step test with HR measurements, and a VO2max treadmill test. The MRM included step-test HR, age, sex, body mass index, and questionnaire scores, whereas the LEM included step-test HR, predetermined constant VO2 values, and age-predicted maximal HR. Systematic differences between estimated and measured VO2max values were detected using Bland-Altman plots. The standard errors of the estimates of the MRM and LEM were 4.15 and 5.08 mL·kg-1·min-1, respectively. The range of 95% limits of agreement for the LEM was wider than that for the MRM. Fixed biases were not significant for both methods, and a significant proportional bias was observed only in the MRM. MRM bias was eliminated using the LEM application when the MRM-estimated VO2max was ≥45 mL·kg-1·min-1. In conclusion, substantial proportional bias in the MRM may be mitigated using the LEM within a limited range.
Keywords: cardiorespiratory fitness; exercise test; occupational health; physical fitness.