Assessing the Reliability and Validity of the Chester Step Test 2 to Predict Aerobic Capacity

• Published in: Measurement in physical education and exercise science Vol. 29; no. 4; pp. 404 - 411
• Main Authors: Burt, Dean, Forsyth, Jacky, Jones, Sam, Buckley, John
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Routledge 02.10.2025
• Subjects: cardiovascular fitness; Chester Step Test; maximal oxygen uptake; reliability; validity
• ISSN: 1091-367X; 1532-7841
• DOI: 10.1080/1091367X.2025.2481864

The Chester Step Test (CST) is used in occupational and healthcare settings to estimate cardiovascular fitness ( $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max ); however, in attempts to overcome $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max - prediction error, a revised version has been developed (CST2). This study investigated the test-retest reliability and criterion validity of the CST2. In a randomized order, at the same time of day, with at least 24 hours rest between trials, 50 healthy participants (32 males, 18 females, age: 34.9 ± 10.9 y, body mass: 79.1 ± 14.5 kg, stature: 174.3 ± 10.9 cm) completed the CST2 twice (CST2a; CST2b) and a treadmill-based $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max test. Test-retest reliability and criterion validity were examined using a repeated measures ANOVA and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA). No significant bias was reported between the CST2a and CST2b predicted and actual $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max (p > .05). The bias ±95% LoA (−0.48 ± 3.4 ml.kg −1. min −1 ) suggest that the CST2 is a reliable predictor of $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max . However, the bias ±95% LoA between the CST2 predicted and actual $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max ranged from 1.08-1.6 ± 11-11.5 ml.kg −1. min −1 , translating to a 31% prediction error. The CST2 is a reliable measure of $\dot V{O_{2\max }}$ V ˙ O 2 max however should only be considered when an estimate is required.