Session Rating of Perceived Exertion Is a Valid Method to Monitor Intensity of Exercise in Adults with Acute Burn Injuries.

IF 1.2 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Joanne S Page, Dale W Edgar, Tiffany L Grisbrook, Angela Jacques, Paul M Gittings, Fiona M Wood, Carly J Brade
{"title":"Session Rating of Perceived Exertion Is a Valid Method to Monitor Intensity of Exercise in Adults with Acute Burn Injuries.","authors":"Joanne S Page, Dale W Edgar, Tiffany L Grisbrook, Angela Jacques, Paul M Gittings, Fiona M Wood, Carly J Brade","doi":"10.3390/ebj6010004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Measuring exercise intensity for safety and to inform prescription in acute burn survivors, is challenging. This study aimed to assess the validity of adult patient end-of-workout rating of session perceived exertion (sRPE); and calculated training load (TL) (sRPE × session duration) as measures of exercise intensity. Secondly, the study aimed to compare clinician and patient perception of exercise effort during physiotherapist-led sessions. Repeated RPE data were collected every 5-min during two resistance exercise sessions completed by 25 burns patients. Physiological (heart rate [HR], blood lactate [BLa]) and perceptual measures (sRPE, ratings of pain, fatigue, delayed onset muscle soreness, sleep quality and stress) were also captured. Adjusted, multivariable linear regression models were used to determine the associations between sRPE and TL and significant predictor variables. Paired <i>t</i>-tests were performed to compare clinician and participant sRPE. Results: Average RPE calculated from 5-min repeats, after adjustment for age and %TBSA, was significantly associated with sRPE, <i>F</i>(1, 45) = 100.82, (<i>p</i> < 0.001, adjusted <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.64) and TL, <i>F</i>(1, 45) = 33.66, (<i>p</i> < 0.001, adjusted <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.39). No significant differences between patient and clinician sRPE were apparent (<i>p</i> = 0.948). Thus, one-off reporting of sRPE and calculated TL may be appropriate markers to monitor exercise intensity and aid prescription in individuals with burn injuries, regardless of patient and burn characteristics or time since burn. There was also no difference between patient and clinician's perceptions of exercise effort.</p>","PeriodicalId":72961,"journal":{"name":"European burn journal","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843880/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European burn journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ebj6010004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Measuring exercise intensity for safety and to inform prescription in acute burn survivors, is challenging. This study aimed to assess the validity of adult patient end-of-workout rating of session perceived exertion (sRPE); and calculated training load (TL) (sRPE × session duration) as measures of exercise intensity. Secondly, the study aimed to compare clinician and patient perception of exercise effort during physiotherapist-led sessions. Repeated RPE data were collected every 5-min during two resistance exercise sessions completed by 25 burns patients. Physiological (heart rate [HR], blood lactate [BLa]) and perceptual measures (sRPE, ratings of pain, fatigue, delayed onset muscle soreness, sleep quality and stress) were also captured. Adjusted, multivariable linear regression models were used to determine the associations between sRPE and TL and significant predictor variables. Paired t-tests were performed to compare clinician and participant sRPE. Results: Average RPE calculated from 5-min repeats, after adjustment for age and %TBSA, was significantly associated with sRPE, F(1, 45) = 100.82, (p < 0.001, adjusted R2 = 0.64) and TL, F(1, 45) = 33.66, (p < 0.001, adjusted R2 = 0.39). No significant differences between patient and clinician sRPE were apparent (p = 0.948). Thus, one-off reporting of sRPE and calculated TL may be appropriate markers to monitor exercise intensity and aid prescription in individuals with burn injuries, regardless of patient and burn characteristics or time since burn. There was also no difference between patient and clinician's perceptions of exercise effort.

感知运动强度分级是监测成人急性烧伤运动强度的一种有效方法。
测量运动强度的安全性,并告知处方急性烧伤幸存者,是具有挑战性的。本研究旨在评估成人患者运动结束时感知运动强度评分(sRPE)的有效性;并计算训练负荷(TL) (sRPE ×会话时间)作为运动强度的测量。其次,该研究旨在比较临床医生和患者在物理治疗师主导的会议中对运动努力的感知。在25例烧伤患者完成两次阻力运动期间,每5分钟重复收集RPE数据。生理(心率[HR],血乳酸[BLa])和知觉测量(sRPE,疼痛评分,疲劳,延迟性肌肉酸痛,睡眠质量和压力)也被捕获。采用调整后的多变量线性回归模型来确定sRPE与TL和显著预测变量之间的关系。采用配对t检验比较临床医生和参与者的sRPE。结果:经年龄和TBSA %校正后,5 min重复计算的平均RPE与sRPE显著相关,F(1,45) = 100.82 (p < 0.001,校正R2 = 0.64), TL, F(1,45) = 33.66 (p < 0.001,校正R2 = 0.39)。两组患者sRPE差异无统计学意义(p = 0.948)。因此,一次性报告sRPE和计算TL可能是监测运动强度和帮助烧伤患者处方的适当标记,而不考虑患者和烧伤特征或烧伤后的时间。患者和临床医生对运动强度的看法也没有差异。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信