Validity of the Borg 6–20 categories obtegories obtained in incremental testing for prescribing aerobic exercise intensity: a systematic review

Abstract

Purpose.Self-regulation of exercise intensity with the Borg 6–20 scale seems a promising alternative, since the magnitude of effort is regulated by internal factors inherent to the individual and their perception of effort during the activity. In order to verify this hypothesis, some studies have tested the validity of the Borg 6–20 scale for prescribing exercise intensity. The study aim was to review the literature and verify the validity of the Borg 6–20 scale in aerobic exercise prescription.Methods.The PICOS strategy was used to conduct the search for evidence concerning the objectives of the review as recommended by PRISMA-P. The level and quality of evidence were analysed by using the Cochrane Collaboration’s recommendation for systematic reviews.Results.A total of 1434 references were found. After applying the criteria of inclusion, 15 studies were considered eligible for review. These studies generally tested the validity of intensity-regulated prescriptions with rating of perceived exertion (RPE) by comparing physiological and performance measures obtained in incremental tests or conventional prescriptions with the measures generated by prescriptions regulated with the Borg 6–20 scale. In addition, some studies evaluated the reliability and reproducibility of RPE-regulated prescriptions by comparing physiological and performance measures obtained from different intensity-regulated exercise sessions with the Borg 6–20 scale.Conclusions.According to the studies investigated in this systematic review, the recommendation of the Borg 6–20 scale in exercise prescription is not yet a valid alternative to describe similar intensity magnitudes to physiological and performance variables.