Method Agreement between Two Field Measures of Aerobic Fitness in Youth

Abstract

0924 PURPOSE: Physical education programs using the FITNESSGRAM youth fitness battery (Cooper Institute, 1999) can use either the PACER 20m shuttle run test or the mile run test to estimate aerobic capacity. The purpuse of this study was to examine the agreement between the PACER test (PACER) and the Mile Run test (MILE) and to evaluate the criterion validity of the tests compared to a laboratory-based measure of aerobic capacity. METHODS: A sample of 473 7th and 8th graders (271 males and 202 females) completed both the PACER and the MILE under controlled field conditions. A subsample of 48 participants (31 males and 17 females) completed a maximum aerobic capacity test on a treadmill. Correlations among the different tests were computed to reflect overall agreement among the methods. Estimated VO2 max values from the field tests were compared to the measured VO2 max values using a repeated measures ANOVA. Classification agreement with the FITNESSGRAM criterion referenced standards were also performed to determine the impact of any differences on the resulting feedback messages delivered to children. RESULTS: Correlations with the measured VO2 max value were moderate for both the MILE (r = 0.64) and the PACER (r = 0.51). The repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant differences between the estimated VO2 max and the measured VO2max values [F(1,471) = 69.67, p < .001]. Both field tests significantly overestimated the measured VO2 max value for males (PACER: ES = 0.38; MILE: ES = 0.69) and females (PACER: ES = 0.71; MILE: ES = 0.89). The overall agreement between the two field tests was good but the PACER yielded significantly lower estimates of VO2 max (difference = 1.6 ml/kg/min; ES = 0.30). The classification agreement based on meeting or not meeting the FITNESSGRAM criterion referenced standards were 82% for males and 79% for females. CONCLUSIONS: The two field assessments of aerobic fitness in the FITNESSGRAM provide similar estimates of aerobic capacity but both overestimate aerobic capacity in middle school youth. Supported in part by a grant from Research Consortium – AAHPERD.