Validity of the Maximal Heart Rate Prediction Models among Runners and Cyclists

Abstract

Maximal heart rate (HRmax) is a widely used measure of cardiorespiratory fitness. Prediction of HRmax is an alternative to cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), but its accuracy among endurance athletes (EA) requires evaluation. This study aimed to externally validate HRmax prediction models in the EA independently for running and cycling CPET. A total of 4043 runners (age = 33.6 (8.1) years; 83.5% males; BMI = 23.7 (2.5) kg·m -2) and 1026 cyclists (age = 36.9 (9.0) years; 89.7% males; BMI = 24.0 (2.7) kg·m -2) underwent maximum CPET. Student t-test, mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and root mean square error (RMSE) were applied to validate eight running and five cycling HRmax equations externally. HRmax was 184.6 (9.8) beats·min -1 and 182.7 (10.3) beats·min -1, respectively, for running and cycling, p = 0.001. Measured and predicted HRmax differed significantly ( p = 0.001) for 9 of 13 (69.2%) models. HRmax was overestimated by eight (61.5%) and underestimated by five (38.5%) formulae. Overestimated HRmax amounted to 4.9 beats·min -1 and underestimated HRmax was in the range up to 4.9 beats·min -1. RMSE was 9.1-10.5. MAPE ranged to 4.7%. Prediction models allow for limited precision of HRmax estimation and present inaccuracies. HRmax was more often underestimated than overestimated. Predicted HRmax can be implemented for EA as a supplemental method, but CPET is the preferable method.