Test-retest reliability of exercise blood pressure and the workload-indexed systolic blood pressure slope in healthy males and females.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY
Journal of applied physiology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1152/japplphysiol.00493.2024
Sydney E Hilton, Alise D Rycroft, Tanvir S Matharu, Pardeep K Khangura, Julian C Bommarito, Leilani C Rocha, Rileigh K Stapleton, Massimo Nardone, Philip J Millar
{"title":"Test-retest reliability of exercise blood pressure and the workload-indexed systolic blood pressure slope in healthy males and females.","authors":"Sydney E Hilton, Alise D Rycroft, Tanvir S Matharu, Pardeep K Khangura, Julian C Bommarito, Leilani C Rocha, Rileigh K Stapleton, Massimo Nardone, Philip J Millar","doi":"10.1152/japplphysiol.00493.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The reliability of blood pressure (BP) measured during submaximal and maximal exercise, and confounding effects of biological sex, remain to be fully established but have implications for using exercise BP as a cardiovascular risk factor. We hypothesize that exercise BP test-retest reliability will not differ between sexes but will be higher during submaximal compared to maximal exercise. Eighty-four participants (22 ± 5 yr; 36 females) completed two maximal treadmill tests (modified Bruce protocol) separated by ≥2 days. Exercise BP was measured every 90 s using automated auscultation (Tango M2 monitor). Breath-by-breath oxygen uptake was analyzed. Test-retest reliability was assessed using two-way, mixed-effects, consistency, single-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis on the total group and separated by sex at submaximal and maximal exercise. Systolic BP during submaximal (ICC = 0.65 [0.49-0.76], <i>P</i> < 0.01) and maximal (ICC = 0.66 [0.52-0.77], <i>P</i> < 0.01) exercise both displayed substantial reliability between visits. In contrast, the SBP/MET slope showed poor submaximal (ICC = 0.12 [-0.09-0.33], <i>P</i> = 0.13) but substantial maximal (ICC = 0.63 [0.48-0.75], <i>P</i> < 0.01) exercise reliability. Females showed substantial reliability in submaximal systolic BP (ICC = 0.73 [0.53-0.85], <i>P</i> < 0.01) and peak systolic BP (ICC = 0.74 [0.54-0.87], <i>P</i> < 0.01) and SBP/MET slope (ICC = 0.78 [0.60-0.88], <i>P</i> < 0.01); the submaximal SBP/MET slope had fair reliability (ICC = 0.28 [-0.06-0.56], <i>P</i> = 0.05). Males showed moderate reliability in submaximal systolic BP (ICC = 0.53 [0.26-0.72], <i>P</i> < 0.01) and peak systolic BP (ICC = 0.41 [0.15-0.62], <i>P</i> < 0.01) and SBP/MET slope (ICC = 0.48 [0.22-0.67], <i>P</i> < 0.01); the submaximal SBP/MET slope had poor reliability (ICC = 0.06 [-0.18-0.31], <i>P</i> = 0.32). Systolic BP showed similar reliability during submaximal and maximal exercise, with females demonstrating higher reliability in exercise systolic BP compared to males.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> Limited work has assessed the reliability of exercise blood pressure (BP) in young healthy males and females. Our results demonstrate that systolic BP test-retest reliability did not differ between submaximal and maximal exercise. Sex-specific analysis found that females had higher reliability in exercise systolic BP than males. Despite the acceptable average reliability, exercise BP measured using automated auscultation possesses wide confidence intervals, which impact sample size requirements in future trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":15160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied physiology","volume":" ","pages":"1425-1433"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00493.2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The reliability of blood pressure (BP) measured during submaximal and maximal exercise, and confounding effects of biological sex, remain to be fully established but have implications for using exercise BP as a cardiovascular risk factor. We hypothesize that exercise BP test-retest reliability will not differ between sexes but will be higher during submaximal compared to maximal exercise. Eighty-four participants (22 ± 5 yr; 36 females) completed two maximal treadmill tests (modified Bruce protocol) separated by ≥2 days. Exercise BP was measured every 90 s using automated auscultation (Tango M2 monitor). Breath-by-breath oxygen uptake was analyzed. Test-retest reliability was assessed using two-way, mixed-effects, consistency, single-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis on the total group and separated by sex at submaximal and maximal exercise. Systolic BP during submaximal (ICC = 0.65 [0.49-0.76], P < 0.01) and maximal (ICC = 0.66 [0.52-0.77], P < 0.01) exercise both displayed substantial reliability between visits. In contrast, the SBP/MET slope showed poor submaximal (ICC = 0.12 [-0.09-0.33], P = 0.13) but substantial maximal (ICC = 0.63 [0.48-0.75], P < 0.01) exercise reliability. Females showed substantial reliability in submaximal systolic BP (ICC = 0.73 [0.53-0.85], P < 0.01) and peak systolic BP (ICC = 0.74 [0.54-0.87], P < 0.01) and SBP/MET slope (ICC = 0.78 [0.60-0.88], P < 0.01); the submaximal SBP/MET slope had fair reliability (ICC = 0.28 [-0.06-0.56], P = 0.05). Males showed moderate reliability in submaximal systolic BP (ICC = 0.53 [0.26-0.72], P < 0.01) and peak systolic BP (ICC = 0.41 [0.15-0.62], P < 0.01) and SBP/MET slope (ICC = 0.48 [0.22-0.67], P < 0.01); the submaximal SBP/MET slope had poor reliability (ICC = 0.06 [-0.18-0.31], P = 0.32). Systolic BP showed similar reliability during submaximal and maximal exercise, with females demonstrating higher reliability in exercise systolic BP compared to males.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Limited work has assessed the reliability of exercise blood pressure (BP) in young healthy males and females. Our results demonstrate that systolic BP test-retest reliability did not differ between submaximal and maximal exercise. Sex-specific analysis found that females had higher reliability in exercise systolic BP than males. Despite the acceptable average reliability, exercise BP measured using automated auscultation possesses wide confidence intervals, which impact sample size requirements in future trials.

健康男性和女性运动血压和工作量指数收缩压斜率的重测可靠性。
亚极限运动和极限运动时测量的血压(BP)的可靠性以及生理性别的混杂效应仍有待完全确定,但这对使用运动血压作为心血管风险因素有影响。我们假设,运动血压的重复测试可靠性在性别上没有差异,但在亚极限运动时会比极限运动时高。84 名参与者(22±5 岁;36 名女性)完成了两次最大跑步机测试(改良布鲁斯方案),两次测试间隔≥2 天。使用自动听诊(Tango M2 监测器)每隔 90 秒测量一次运动血压。分析逐次呼吸的摄氧量。采用双向、混合效应、一致性、单测者类内相关系数(ICC)分析,对全组和按性别分列的亚极限和极限运动时的测试-重测可靠性进行评估。亚极限运动时的收缩压(ICC=0.65 [0.49-0.76], p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
296
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Physiology publishes the highest quality original research and reviews that examine novel adaptive and integrative physiological mechanisms in humans and animals that advance the field. The journal encourages the submission of manuscripts that examine the acute and adaptive responses of various organs, tissues, cells and/or molecular pathways to environmental, physiological and/or pathophysiological stressors. As an applied physiology journal, topics of interest are not limited to a particular organ system. The journal, therefore, considers a wide array of integrative and translational research topics examining the mechanisms involved in disease processes and mitigation strategies, as well as the promotion of health and well-being throughout the lifespan. Priority is given to manuscripts that provide mechanistic insight deemed to exert an impact on the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信