Article Text
Abstract
Objectives Exergames can replace sedentary time spent on computer gaming with physical activity. Previous research has found exergaming to elicit light-to-moderate exercise intensity. Our primary aim was to examine the exercise intensity of a newly developed biking exergame.
Methods Eight males (23.9±0.6 years) played the exergame (PLAY) and walked (WALK) on three separate occasions, with the condition counterbalanced and in random sequence within each day. They were asked to PLAY and WALK for a minimum of 15 min and then continue for as long as they wanted. We measured heart rate (HR), activity duration, caloric expenditure and subject-rated exertion and enjoyment (based on 0–10 Visual Analogue Scale, VAS). We used an average of each outcome variable across the 3 days in the analysis.
Results The average intensity during PLAY (73%±10% of HRmax) was significantly higher than that during WALK (57%±7% of HRmax, p=0.01). Participants spent 12.5±5.3 min at 80%–89% of HRmax and 5.5±4.6 min at ≥90% of HRmax during PLAY, whereas intensity during WALK was ≤72% of HRmax. The duration of PLAY was 44.3±0.7 min and of WALK 17.0±0.7 min (p=0.01). The relative energy expenditure during PLAY was 7.6±0.7 kcal/min and during WALK 6.2±0.3 kcal/min (p<0.01). The enjoyment of PLAY (VAS 8.7±0.1) was higher than that of WALK (VAS 3.9±1.8, p=0.01).
Conclusions Exergaming can be an innovative way of enjoyable high-intensity training.
- physical activity
- intermittent exercise
- intensity
- motivation
- technology
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors SW, KC, AIW, KH and TM designed the study. SW and KH collected the data. KH and TM analysed the data. TM wrote the manuscript draft. SW, KC, AIW and KH revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval We submitted the study protocol to the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK5midt 2015/2262) and to the Norwegian Centre for Research Data. Both bodies evaluated the study as not subject to notification.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement All data from the study is available on request.