Document Type




Format of Original

9 p.

Publication Date



Elsevier (WB Saunders)

Source Publication

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Source ISSN


Original Item ID

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.01.013; Shelves: RM 845 .A8 2016, Memorial Periodicals; PubMed Central, PMCID: 26836954


Objective: To test the reliability and validity of using the Borg rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale (ratings 6e20) in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS).

Design: Nonrandomized repeated measures.

Setting: Research laboratory.

Participants: Volunteer sample (N=27) comprised of 16 PwMS (10 women) and 11 age-matched persons without multiple sclerosis (MS) (6 women). Clinical measures included symptomatic fatigue, depression, and MS functional capacity.

Interventions: A submaximal cycling test was performed to estimate maximal capacity. Participants then pedaled for 2 minutes at 50% and 60% of predicted maximal oxygen consumption per unit time (V̇O2), and physiological measures and RPE were obtained (week 1: response protocol). One week later, participants replicated the prescribed V̇O2 using the RPE range from week 1 (week 2: reproduction protocol). V̇O2, heart rate, and respiratory quotient were measured continuously; RPE and workload were measured every minute; and blood lactate and mean arterial pressure were measured after exercise.

Main Outcome Measures: RPE, workload, V̇O2, and heart rate from week 1 to week 2.

Results: PwMS had greater fatigue (P2, and heart rate were similar between groups. Both groups had an intraclass correlation coefficient >.86 for RPE, workload, and V̇O2. The intraclass correlation coefficient was comparatively lower for heart rate for both groups (MS group: .72, non-MS group: .83). RPE was highly correlated with V̇O2(rZ.691, P

Conclusions: Results suggest that RPE can be reliably reproduced, is valid, and may be used in exercise prescription in mildly to moderately impaired PwMS during cycling exercise.


Accepted version. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vol. 97, No. 6 (June 2016): 974-982. DOI. © 2016 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Used with permission.