Luciana Carletti

Luciana Carletti

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

38Years (1989-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 January 2019 in Rheumatology International
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SMSamira Tatiyama Miyamoto
Samira Tatiyama Miyamoto
VVValeria Valim
Valeria Valim
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
WNWan-Fai Ng
Wan-Fai Ng
APAnselmo José Perez
Anselmo José Perez
JNJamil Natour
Jamil Natour

LNLeticia Nascimento Santos Neves
Leticia Nascimento Santos Neves
Victor Hugo Gasparini NetoVictor Hugo Gasparini Neto
Victor Hugo Gasparini Neto
IAIgor Ziviani Araujo
Igor Ziviani Araujo
RBRicardo Augusto Barbieri
Ricardo Augusto Barbieri
RLRichard Leite
Richard Leite
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
This study aims to analyze the agreement and precision between heart rate variability thresholds (HRVT1/2) with ventilatory and lactate thresholds 1 and 2 (VT1/2 and LT1/2) on a treadmill. Thirty-four male students were recruited. Day 1 consisted of conducting a health survey, anthropometrics, and Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test (CPx). On Day 2, after 48 h, a second incremental test was performed, the Cardiopulmonary Stepwise Exercise Test consisting of 3 min stages (CPxS), to determine VT1/2, LT1/2, and HRVT1/2. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA and effect size (ηp2) were used, followed by Sidak’s post hoc. The Coefficient of Variation (CV) and Typical Error (TE) were applied to verify the precision. Bland Altman and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) were applied to confirm the agreement. HRVT1 showed different values compared to LT1 (lactate, RER, and R-R interval) and VT1 (V̇E, RER, V̇CO2, and HR). No differences were found in threshold 2 (T2) between LT2, VT2, and HRVT2. No difference was found in speed and V̇O2 for T1 and T2. The precision was low to T1 (CV > 12% and TE > 10%) and good to T2 (CV < 12% and TE < 10%). The agreement was good to fair in threshold 1 (VT1, LT1, HRVT1) and excellent to good in T2 (VT1, LT1, HRVT1). HRVT1 is not a valid method (low precision) when using this protocol to estimate LT1 and VT1. However, HRVT2 is a valid and noninvasive method that can estimate LT2 and VT2, showing good agreement and precision in healthy adults.

1 September 2022 in Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Victor Hugo Gasparini NetoVictor Hugo Gasparini Neto
Victor Hugo Gasparini Neto
LNLeticia Nascimento Santos Neves
Leticia Nascimento Santos Neves
CKCarlos A. Kalva-Filho
Carlos A. Kalva-Filho
Paulo Adriano SchwingelPaulo Adriano Schwingel
Paulo Adriano Schwingel
RLRichard Leite
Richard Leite
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
To propose a new Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test with Elastic Resistance (CPxEL) and compare the physiological responses to conventional cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPx) performed on a treadmill. In addition, we tested the reproducibility of the CPxEL. Twenty-four physically active participants completed the CPx (first session) and CPxEL twice (second and third sessions) interspersed by seven days. A treadmill protocol with increments of 1km·h-1 every minute until exhaustion was used in CPx. The CPxEL consisted of performing alternating steps back-and-forth against an elastic resistance attached to a belt and an incremental protocol with 1 stage (S) per minute following a cadence of 200 bpm controlled by a metronome in an 8-stage rubber mat. First analysis: first ventilatory threshold (VT1) occurred at 69.7% and 75.3% of maximal heart rate (HRmax) and 53.5% and 65.7% of maximal oxygen consumption (V̇O2max). Second VT (VT2) occurred at 93.3% and 96.8% of the HRmax and 87.0% and 96.9% of V̇O2max for CPx and CPxEL, respectively. At exhaustion, V̇O2max, perceived exertion (BORG-CR10 and OMNI-RES EB), and test duration presented lower values for CPxEL (P < 0.05). Second analysis: VT1 occurred at warm-up (S0) (P = 0.731), VT2 occurred at S5 (P = 0.912), and the exhaustion occurred at S6 and S7 (P = 0.271) for CPxEL and retest, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for V̇O2max was 0.921 and for HRmax was 0.930. The CPxEL has good test-retest reproducibility and represents a possible and interesting add-on to determine maximal oxygen consumption, maximal heart rate, and second ventilatory threshold without using traditional ergometers.

1 January 2021 in Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Victor Hugo Gasparini NetoVictor Hugo Gasparini Neto
Victor Hugo Gasparini Neto
LCLEONARDO CARVALHO CALDAS
LEONARDO CARVALHO CALDAS
CLClaudio Andre Barbosa de Lira
Claudio Andre Barbosa de Lira
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
RLRichard Leite
Richard Leite
RVRodrigo Vancini
Rodrigo Vancini

LNLetícia Nascimento Santos Neves
Letícia Nascimento Santos Neves
Victor Hugo Gasparini NetoVictor Hugo Gasparini Neto
Victor Hugo Gasparini Neto
RLRichard Diego Leite
Richard Diego Leite
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
This study aims to describe and compare cardiopulmonary and subjective responses during high-intensity interval training with elastic resistance (EL-HIIT) and traditional high-intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions. Twenty-two healthy adults (27.6 ± 4.4 years) performed an EL-HIIT and a HIIT protocol consisting of 10 × 1 min at ~85% V·O2max prescribed by cardiopulmonary-specific tests. Pulmonary parameters, heart rate (HR), blood lactate, and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured during exercise. Paired t-test and Cohen’s d effect size were used to compare peak and average values. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA and mixed model with Bonferroni’s post hoc test were used to compare each bout during the session. The EL-HIIT session showed higher peak and average values of HR, ventilation (V·E), relative and absolute oxygen uptake (V·O2), carbon dioxide production (V·CO2), and RPE than HIIT (p < 0.05). The effect size (ES) comparing HIIT and EL-HIIT was large for HR, V·E, and lactate (≥0.8) in peak values. Comparing each bout between HIIT and EL-HIIT, no difference was found in peak values (p > 0.05) during the session (excluding baseline, warm-up, and recovery). EL-HIIT presented a more pronounced cardiopulmonary and subjective response than HIIT.

1 January 2019 in Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria & Desempenho Humano
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Victor Hugo Gasparini NetoVictor Hugo Gasparini Neto
Victor Hugo Gasparini Neto
PAPaulo Azevedo
Paulo Azevedo
LCLuciana Carletti
Luciana Carletti
APAnselmo José Perez
Anselmo José Perez
Training near or at ventilatory threshold (VT) is an adequate stimulus to improve the thresholds for sedentary subjects, but a higher intensity is necessary for conditioned subjects. The choice of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPx) protocol has an influence on VTs identification and can reduce their reliability for exercise prescription. This study tested if VO2 and heart rate (HR) corresponding to first (VT1) and second ventilatory threshold (VT2) determined during a ramp protocol were equivalent to those observed in rectangular load exercises at the same intensity in runners elite athletes (EA) and non-athletes (NA). Eighteen health subjects were divided into two groups: EA (n = 9, VO2max 68.6 mL·kg-1·min-1) and NA (n = 9, VO2max 47.2 mL·kg-1·min-1). They performed CPx and 48h and 96h later, a continuous running lasting 1 h for VT1 and until exhaustion for VT2. The results showed that EA at VT1 session, presented delta differences for VO2 (+9.1%, p = 0.125) vs. NA (+20.5%, p = 0.012). The Bland-Altman plots for VT1 presented biases of (4.4 ± 6.9) and (5.5 ± 5.6 mLO2·kg-1·min-1) for AE and NA, respectively. In VT2, the VO2 and HR of the NA showed biases of (0.4 ± 2.9 mLO2·kg-1·min-1) and (4.9 ± 4.2 bpm). The ramp protocol used in this study was inappropriate for NA because it underestimates the values of VO2 and HR at VT1 found in the rectangular load exercise. The HR showed good agreement at VT2 with CPx and may be a good parameter for controlling exercise intensity.