In a gym or exercise context, testing is required to understand your current baseline and we refer to this as a reference point to understand how much or how little someone may have progressed over time. Maximal tests are considered the ‘gold standard’ for assessing various capacities and as such are deemed the most accurate reflection of progression. For example, the gold standard test for assessing cardiorespiratory capacity is a VO2 max test on a treadmill or cycle ergometer, generally done to the Bruce Protocol. Another example is a 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) test of a resistance training exercise for assessing muscular strength.
While these tests are considered the most accurate and most reliable, we could also complete sub-maximal tests. These tests do not push the client as hard as maximal tests, but they certainly have their place in clinical practice. Examples of cardiorespiratory sub-max tests include a modified Bruce Treadmill Test, the 6-Minute Walk Test, and the Queen’s College Step Test. Examples of sub-max tests for muscular strength include a 5-repetition maximum for a resistance training exercise, and the Five-Times Sit-to-Stand.
Reasons to DO maximal testing:
Most accurate measurements that can be taken, which leads to:
- Design of more effective exercise prescription
- More accurate reflection of exercise program effectiveness
- Greater prediction of future progressions
Reasons to not do a maximal test:
- Equipment not available
- Longer time taken to administer (a Bruce Treadmill test usually takes up to 30 minutes, not including prep time!)
- Medical conditions where the risks outweigh the benefits
From the list above, we can derive that the reasons to do a submaximal test include:
- Less equipment required
- Less time to administer
- Not as taxing on the participant (good for if the participant has other medical conditions which makes a maximal test less optimal).
- Easier for staff to learn and administer
While maximal exercise tests are considered the gold standard, sub-maximal tests are deemed as both valid and reliable, especially the closer the test protocol goes to resembling a maximal test (eg. A 5-RM squat is a more accurate leg strength test than a Five-Time Sit-to-Stand). This makes sub-maximal testing a very useful tool for clinicians and patients alike to continue to advance exercise prescription and results into the long-term.