David Sá Couto, Inês Lopes, Maria Isilda Oliveira, Cristine Schmidt, Sandra Magalhães, Hélder Dores, Fernando Ribeiro, Mário Santos
{"title":"Exercise intensity prescription in heart failure: A comparison of different physiological parameters.","authors":"David Sá Couto, Inês Lopes, Maria Isilda Oliveira, Cristine Schmidt, Sandra Magalhães, Hélder Dores, Fernando Ribeiro, Mário Santos","doi":"10.1016/j.repc.2024.11.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and objective: </strong>Aerobic exercise intensity prescription is critical for the efficacy and safety of heart failure (HF) patients' rehabilitation programs. This study aims to compare some of the commonly used parameters for range-based exercise intensity prescription, with a ventilatory threshold-based approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed data from 163 HF patients across a left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) spectrum who underwent maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). We measured percentages of peak oxygen uptake (VO<sub>2</sub>), peak heart rate (HR) and heart rate reserve (HRR) at the first ventilatory threshold (VT1). We compared the classification within the different exercise intensity (EI) domains defined by the current guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VT1 was observed at 82±10% of peak HR, 54±25% of HRR and 54±17% of peak VO<sub>2</sub>, corresponding to the high intensity for % Peak HR, and moderate intensity domain for %HRR and % Peak VO<sub>2</sub>. Using % Peak VO<sub>2</sub>, 65% of the patients were accurately classified within the correct EI domain (moderate intensity) at VT1; however, this percentage dropped to 46% when employing %HRR and to 25% when using % Peak HR. The classification accuracy at VT1 was superior in patients with reduced LVEF and in those with higher exercise capacity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our data show that EI will be misclassified in one out of three patients if guided by current guideline-recommended range-based parameters, which emphasizes the relevance of a ventilatory threshold-based approach to adequate exercise prescription in HF patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":48985,"journal":{"name":"Revista Portuguesa De Cardiologia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Portuguesa De Cardiologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.repc.2024.11.018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction and objective: Aerobic exercise intensity prescription is critical for the efficacy and safety of heart failure (HF) patients' rehabilitation programs. This study aims to compare some of the commonly used parameters for range-based exercise intensity prescription, with a ventilatory threshold-based approach.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 163 HF patients across a left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) spectrum who underwent maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). We measured percentages of peak oxygen uptake (VO2), peak heart rate (HR) and heart rate reserve (HRR) at the first ventilatory threshold (VT1). We compared the classification within the different exercise intensity (EI) domains defined by the current guidelines.
Results: VT1 was observed at 82±10% of peak HR, 54±25% of HRR and 54±17% of peak VO2, corresponding to the high intensity for % Peak HR, and moderate intensity domain for %HRR and % Peak VO2. Using % Peak VO2, 65% of the patients were accurately classified within the correct EI domain (moderate intensity) at VT1; however, this percentage dropped to 46% when employing %HRR and to 25% when using % Peak HR. The classification accuracy at VT1 was superior in patients with reduced LVEF and in those with higher exercise capacity.
Conclusion: Our data show that EI will be misclassified in one out of three patients if guided by current guideline-recommended range-based parameters, which emphasizes the relevance of a ventilatory threshold-based approach to adequate exercise prescription in HF patients.
期刊介绍:
The Portuguese Journal of Cardiology, the official journal of the Portuguese Society of Cardiology, was founded in 1982 with the aim of keeping Portuguese cardiologists informed through the publication of scientific articles on areas such as arrhythmology and electrophysiology, cardiovascular surgery, intensive care, coronary artery disease, cardiovascular imaging, hypertension, heart failure and cardiovascular prevention. The Journal is a monthly publication with high standards of quality in terms of scientific content and production. Since 1999 it has been published in English as well as Portuguese, which has widened its readership abroad. It is distributed to all members of the Portuguese Societies of Cardiology, Internal Medicine, Pneumology and Cardiothoracic Surgery, as well as to leading non-Portuguese cardiologists and to virtually all cardiology societies worldwide. It has been referred in Medline since 1987.