Rock Climbing

Morgan Simmons, Aurora Devalon, Makayla Peterson,

Jacque Batchelder, Nicole Brunner, Caleb Oleson, Brian Kutzner,
Gina Pisciotta, Itzel Gonzalez, Matt Jones
Introduction

❖ Rock climbing has become increasingly popular over the last few years, so much so, it will be an Olympic
event in 2020.
❖ Previous studies have been conducted in elite rock climbers to test for increases in heart rate, but there is
a lack of congruous data that evaluates recreational climbers.
❖ Indoor climbing gyms increased at a 10% rate in 2017, which has accommodated for the increased
interest, and has even attracted new climbers to the sport.¹
❖ CDC guidelines for physical activity: 150 minutes/week of moderate intensity (50-70% maximal heart rate)
or 75 minutes/week of high intensity (70-85% maximal heart rate).²
❖ Hypothesis: We hypothesize that rock climbing is a viable form of exercise, and will adhere to the CDC
guidelines for physical activity among adults.

1 (Helt, 2017)
2 (CDC, 2016)
 Subjects
❖ Healthy male and female subjects
between the ages of 18-65 years old
who were actively participating in rock
climbing (twice a week) and had at least
six months of experience.
Mission Valley

Mira Mesa

❖ Subjects were recruited at the Mesa

Rim Rock Climbing gyms at both Mira
Mesa and Mission Valley locations.
Protocol: Questionnaires/Forms
❖ Following recruitment,
subjects’ completed a
questionnaire pertaining
to their climbing habits, as
well as a medical history
form, and informed
consent form.
Protocol: Subject Measurements

❖ Height & Weight were

measured with a beam
physician scale.
❖ Body Fat Percentage
(BF%) and Body Mass
Index (BMI) were
measured using an
OMRON fat loss monitor.

OMRON fat loss monitor HBF-306C (OMRON

Healthcare, Inc., Bannockburn, IL)
Protocol: Subject
Measurements

❖ Grip Strength was measured using a

Hand dynamometer, a handheld
instrument used to measure max grip
strength.
❖ Grip strength was measured pre and
post climbing
➢ Right and left hand alternating (3x each)
➢ The highest result of the three was used as
max grip strength.
Protocol: Subject Measurements

❖ Subjects were instrumented with Polar RCX5 heart rate

transmitter and receiver in order to record heart rate and
climbing time.
Measurements:
Subject Activity
BELAY
BOULDER

LEAD

Insert Lead Picture

TOP ROPE
Here
Measurement &
Statistical Analysis

❖ Data from HR monitors was imported

via Power Lab High Performance data
acquisition hardware and transferred to
Microsoft Excel for coding and analysis.
Subject Characteristics

Subject Sample Age Height Weight BMI BF% Number Days Number of
Characteristics Size (n) (years) (cm) (kg) Climbed per Years Climbing
Week

Male 37 29.35±1.10 175.21±1.42 72.43±1.46 23.03±0.39 12.21±0.78 2.77±0.19 5.99±1.16

Female 14 30±2.26 164.97±1.63 59.74±1.19 21.89±0.64 21.11±1.36 2.79±0.21 3.61±1.39

Group 51 29.53±1.33 172.40±1.29 68.94±1.36 22.72±0.31 14.65±0.87 2.77±0.15 5.33±0.93

Results: Average HR

❖ Average HR Data
➢ Male (129±2.78) BPM
➢ Female (122±3.43) BPM
➢ Group (125 ±2.15) BPM
Results: Exercise Intensity

±±±
❖ Percentage of Age Predicted Max
HR
➢ Male (66.18±1.57)% Max HR
➢ Female (64.41±1.62)% Max HR
➢ Group (65.68±1.22)% Max HR
Results: Average Climbing HR

❖ HR by Climbing Type
➢ Top-Rope (148±4.03) BPM
➢ Bouldering (138±2.60) BPM
➢ Non-Climbing (121±2.57) BPM
❖ Significance
➢ Top-Rope vs Bouldering (P=0.03482830731)
➢ Top-Rope vs Non-climbing (P=0.000000073046624)
➢ Bouldering vs Non-climbing (P=0.00004807334803)
Results: Climbing Session Duration

❖ Total Duration of Climbing Sessions

➢ Male (86.13±5.31) Min
➢ Female (107.89±11.24) Min
➢ Group (92.11±5.07) Min
Results: Grip Strength

❖ Grip strength info

➢ Pre-Climb Grip (51.60±1.13) Kg
➢ Post-Climb Grip (45.10±1.14) Kg
➢ Fatigue Index (12.65±1.21)% Loss
Discussion: Limitations

❖ Wide range of experience

❖ Couldn’t use all participants data
❖ Performance could change because they were being
monitored
Discussion: Relevance

❖ CDC Guidelines Recap

➢ 150 minutes/week of
moderate intensity
(50-70% maximal heart
rate)
➢ 75 minutes/week of high
intensity (70-85%
maximal heart rate)
Discussion: Major Findings
❖ Average Climbing Time For All Subjects
➢ (92.11±5.07) Minutes

❖ Percentage of Age Predicted Max HR For All

Subjects
➢ (65.68±1.22)% MaxHR

❖ Significant Difference in Average Climbing

Heart Rate
➢ Top-Rope vs Bouldering
➢ Top-Rope vs Non-climbing
➢ Bouldering vs Non-climbing
Discussion: Overall Conclusion

❖ The results of this study are

consistent with other studies
done on different climbing
demographics.
❖ Most participants would meet
CDC recommendation in just
two sessions
❖ We fail to reject our hypothesis
References

1. Sheel, A. (2004). Physiology of sport rock climbing. British Journal of Sports Medicine,38(3),
355-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2003.008169
2. Rodio, A., Fattorini, L., Rosponi, A., Quattrini, F. M., & Marchetti, M. (2008). Physiological Adaptation
in Noncompetitive Rock Climbers: Good for Aerobic Fitness? Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Research,22(2), 359-364. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181635cd0
3. Physical Activity Among Adults. (2016, November 29). Retrieved March 25, 2018, from
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/prevention/policies_practices/physical_activity/adults.htm
4. Target Heart Rate and Estimated Maximum Heart Rate. (2015, August 10). Retrieved March 25,
2018, from https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/measuring/heartrate.htm
5. Helt, Mike, et al. Gyms and trends of 2017. 22 Jan. 2018,
www.climbingbusinessjournal.com/gyms-and-trends-of-2017/.