» Articles » PMID: 34577323

The Validity and Reliability of a Tire Pressure-Based Power Meter for Indoor Cycling

Overview
Journal Sensors (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Biotechnology
Date 2021 Sep 28
PMID 34577323
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of a tire pressure sensor (TPS) cycling power meter against a gold standard (SRM) during indoor cycling. Twelve recreationally active participants completed eight trials of 90 s of cycling at different pedaling and gearing combinations on an indoor hybrid roller. Power output (PO) was simultaneously calculated via TPS and SRM. The analysis compared the paired 1 s PO and 1 min average PO per trial between devices. Agreement was assessed by correlation, linear regression, inferential statistics, effect size, and Bland-Altman LoA. Reliability was assessed by ICC and CV comparison. TPS showed near-perfect correlation with SRM in 1 s ( = 0.97, < 0.001) and 1-min data ( = 0.99, < 0.001). Differences in paired 1 s data were statistically significant ( = 0.04), but of a trivial magnitude ( = 0.05). There was no significant main effect for device (F(1,9) = 0.05, = 0.83, ηp2 = 0.97) in 1 min data and no statistical differences between devices by trial in post hoc analysis ( < 0.01-0.98; < 0.01-0.93). Bias and LoA were -0.21 ± 16.77 W for the 1 min data. Mean TPS bias ranged from 3.37% to 7.81% of the measured SRM mean PO per trial. Linear regression SEE was 7.55 W for 1 min TPS prediction of SRM. ICC across trials was 0.96. No statistical difference ( = 0.09-0.11) in TPS CV (3.6-5.0%) and SRM CV (4.3-4.7%). The TPS is a valid and reliable power meter for estimating average indoor PO for time periods equal to or greater than 1 min and may have acceptable sensitivity to detect changes under less stringent criteria (±5%).

Citing Articles

Editorial-Special Issue on "Sensor Technology for Enhancing Training and Performance in Sport".

Kong P Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(5).

PMID: 36905049 PMC: 10006930. DOI: 10.3390/s23052847.


Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Bouillod A, Soto-Romero G, Grappe F, Bertucci W, Brunet E, Cassirame J Sensors (Basel). 2022; 22(1).

PMID: 35009945 PMC: 8749704. DOI: 10.3390/s22010386.

References
1.
Hopkins W, Schabort E, Hawley J . Reliability of power in physical performance tests. Sports Med. 2001; 31(3):211-34. DOI: 10.2165/00007256-200131030-00005. View

2.
Martin J, Milliken D, Cobb J, McFadden K, Coggan A . Validation of a Mathematical Model for Road Cycling Power. J Appl Biomech. 2017; 14(3):276-291. DOI: 10.1123/jab.14.3.276. View

3.
Pallares J, Lillo-Bevia J . Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1 Pedals Power Meter. J Sports Sci Med. 2018; 17(2):305-311. PMC: 5950748. View

4.
Nimmerichter A, Schnitzer L, Prinz B, Simon D, Wirth K . Validity and Reliability of the Garmin Vector Power Meter in Laboratory and Field Cycling. Int J Sports Med. 2017; 38(6):439-446. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-101909. View

5.
Sparks S, Dove B, Bridge C, Midgely A, McNaughton L . Validity and reliability of the look Keo power pedal system for measuring power output during incremental and repeated sprint cycling. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014; 10(1):39-45. DOI: 10.1123/ijspp.2013-0317. View