Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #16 
You will see for example during a ride when you do max efforts for certain time periods whether you have improved your wattage for that period of time. that is during a ride. Basically nothing more nothing less in terms of progress (not taking into account left right imbalances which you might try to mitigate). Off the bike you track things like training load (based on wattage (so performance based etc.) and other things.

I also think that during the ride tracking progress is something which is kind of dificult in NIRS perspective because it are results of different processes that make SmO2 move upward, downward etc and this is most of the time differnt in different rides.

If you try to do same rides (or assessments) I think that comparing those rides in terms of reactions (trend based) is well possible. However also variation might be attributed to work done before those assessements (or same rides). But again that's off the bike.

That gives the question: what is better? A higher wattage, with higher SmO2, a higher wattage with a lower SmO2, etc? I would say: it depends because some other systems may act as limiter/ compensator.

I do however encourage to collect data and to be able to see things like how long am I riding in my ARI, STEI, etc and can I deduct some pattern in terms of a performance metric like for cycling wattage. / to able to see changes in these ARI/STEI borders to learn more on what does happen for me personally to improve. The reason why I have improved is still something which you can deduce (to a certain extent) from the Moxy, HR, cadence, wattage data which I have available at most.
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #17 
Thanks  Ruud as  always   nice feedback  and nice  information.
 What we  have to learn is  , that  combining different information's  result  in better information. So If you have a  wattage meter  and  MOXY  you  really have much more feedback than when you run  just one  or the other.
 I will again over the  next few month dig deeper into this  section. Will leave the cycling for the cyclists  but will show in  many other sports  how you can use   MOXY  live during a workout  to    have a feedback on  what you do.  So  I like to leave the answer    asked   by Mark   :

 If a cyclist wears a Moxy for each ride what meaningful metrics can be automatically extracted from the data to help track progress?  to  cycling coaches and pros.   and   we  may get some great feed backs  from the  golden cheetah groups  who  collect  and use  MOXY  and have different  great ideas on how to integrate  it  into their sport. This way  we have different feedback  from different sides  and I  love to focus  on  all the rest of the different sports  where we have no wattage    meters  to help  the   integration of  MOXY. 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #18 
Here  a  replay I    am behind  with  for  teh people looking  for metrics  and    math.

 I am wondering if there is a similar way of looking at the Moxy data to calculate a cost, in O2/Hb terms for work done.
I was thinking maybe venous blood flow or total Hb O2 extraction during the interval...

But wondered if anyone had a concrete measure (and formula) we could use.

There are different options  and here  some common once  . The leading  research  used    ideas are nicely   showed in the Artinis    handouts.


Here ideas on   quantifying tHb
absoluite  thb.jpg


tHb    from ven  occl.jpg 



during exerc.jpg
O2  consumption  frm veno occl.jpg 




O2  consumption  frm art occl.jpg


Plus 
 

3.10. Quantitation of absolute blood flow

The principle of measuring organ blood flow with NIRS is based on the Fick

principle which states that the accumulation of a tracer in an organ equals the

difference between the inflow (arterial concentration x flow) and outflow (venous

concentration x flow). If we measure within the transit time of the tracer through

the organ the venous concentration will be zero. In NIRS the tracer used is a bolus

of O2Hb, which can be induced by suddenly increasing the inspired oxygen

concentration. The concentration of the bolus can be measured by attaching a

pulse oximetry probe onto the organ. The increase of O2Hb as measured by NIRS

represents the accumulation of the bolus into the organ. The blood flow (BF, in

ml●100g-1 ●min-1) through the organ is then given by the change of O2Hb divided

by the product of the arterial hemoglobin concentration (cHb, in g●ml-1) times the

integral of change in arterial saturation (SaO2, in %) : K is constant representing the molecular weight of hemoglobin, the tissue density and a metric conversion factor. This methodology has first been described by Edwards et al. [1988] for the determination of cerebral blood flow in newborn

and afterwards by others who made a comparison with the 133Xe clearance method [Skov et al. 1991, Bucher et al. 1993], finding an acceptable correlation between the two methods in newborn. Elwell et al. [1992, 1993] have used it to determine the cerebral blood flow in adults.

Some of the disadvantages of the methodology are firstly that a certain degree of

hypoxia with subsequent hyperoxia is needed to induce the O2Hb bolus. If this

intervention is inert is not known. Furthermore an adequate lung function is

necessary. Secondly a reliable beat-to-beat pulse oximeter is needed for the

measurements, which is generally a problem. Later studies have shown that this

technique is not very reliable.




Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net