Effects of Exercise Testing and Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease on Fear and Self-Efficacy of Exercise: A Pilot Study.

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Meredith G Shea, Samantha G Farris, Jasmin Hutchinson, Samuel Headley, Patrick Schilling, Quinn R Pack
{"title":"Effects of Exercise Testing and Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease on Fear and Self-Efficacy of Exercise: A Pilot Study.","authors":"Meredith G Shea, Samantha G Farris, Jasmin Hutchinson, Samuel Headley, Patrick Schilling, Quinn R Pack","doi":"10.1007/s12529-023-10207-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Exercise fear and low exercise self-efficacy are common in patients attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR). This study tested whether exercise prescription methods influence exercise fear and exercise self-efficacy. We hypothesized that the use of graded exercise testing (GXT) with a target heart rate range exercise prescription, relative to standard exercise prescription using rating of perceived exertion (RPE), would produce greater reductions in exercise fear and increase self-efficacy during CR.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Patients in CR (N = 32) were randomized to an exercise prescription using either RPE or a target heart rate range. Exercise fear and self-efficacy were assessed with questionnaires at three time points: baseline; after the GXT in target heart rate range group; and at session 6 for the RPE group and CR completion. Items were scored on a five-point Likert-type scale with higher mean scores reflecting higher fear of exercise and higher self-efficacy. To analyze mean differences, a mixed effects analysis was run.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant changes in exercise self-efficacy between baseline and discharge from CR; these were not statistically significant (mean differences baseline - 0.63; end - 0.27 (p = 0.13)). Similarly, there was no change in fear between groups (baseline 0.30; end 0.51 (p = 0.37)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients in the RPE and target heart rate groups had non-significant changes in exercise self-efficacy over the course of CR. Contrary to our hypothesis, the use of GXT and target heart rate range did not reduce fear, and we noted sustained or increases in fear of exercise among patients with elevated baseline fear. A more targeted psychological intervention seems warranted to reduce exercise fear and self-efficacy in CR.</p>","PeriodicalId":54208,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"659-668"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884863/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-023-10207-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Exercise fear and low exercise self-efficacy are common in patients attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR). This study tested whether exercise prescription methods influence exercise fear and exercise self-efficacy. We hypothesized that the use of graded exercise testing (GXT) with a target heart rate range exercise prescription, relative to standard exercise prescription using rating of perceived exertion (RPE), would produce greater reductions in exercise fear and increase self-efficacy during CR.

Method: Patients in CR (N = 32) were randomized to an exercise prescription using either RPE or a target heart rate range. Exercise fear and self-efficacy were assessed with questionnaires at three time points: baseline; after the GXT in target heart rate range group; and at session 6 for the RPE group and CR completion. Items were scored on a five-point Likert-type scale with higher mean scores reflecting higher fear of exercise and higher self-efficacy. To analyze mean differences, a mixed effects analysis was run.

Results: There were no significant changes in exercise self-efficacy between baseline and discharge from CR; these were not statistically significant (mean differences baseline - 0.63; end - 0.27 (p = 0.13)). Similarly, there was no change in fear between groups (baseline 0.30; end 0.51 (p = 0.37)).

Conclusion: Patients in the RPE and target heart rate groups had non-significant changes in exercise self-efficacy over the course of CR. Contrary to our hypothesis, the use of GXT and target heart rate range did not reduce fear, and we noted sustained or increases in fear of exercise among patients with elevated baseline fear. A more targeted psychological intervention seems warranted to reduce exercise fear and self-efficacy in CR.

Abstract Image

运动测试和心脏康复对冠心病患者运动恐惧和自我效能的影响:一项试点研究。
背景:参加心脏康复(CR)的患者普遍存在运动恐惧和运动自我效能低的问题。本研究测试了运动处方方法是否会影响运动恐惧和运动自我效能。我们假设,相对于使用感知用力评分(RPE)的标准运动处方,使用目标心率范围运动处方的分级运动测试(GXT)将会更大程度地减少运动恐惧,并提高心脏康复期间的自我效能:方法:CR 患者(32 人)被随机分配到使用 RPE 或目标心率范围的运动处方。在三个时间点使用问卷对运动恐惧和自我效能进行评估:基线;在目标心率范围组进行 GXT 后;RPE 组在疗程 6 和 CR 完成时。问卷项目采用李克特五点量表评分,平均分越高,表示对运动的恐惧感越强,自我效能感越高。为了分析平均差异,我们进行了混合效应分析:从基线到从 CR 出院,运动自我效能感没有发生明显变化;这些变化在统计学上没有意义(平均差异基线 - 0.63;终点 - 0.27 (p = 0.13))。同样,各组之间的恐惧感也没有变化(基线为 0.30;终点为 0.51(P = 0.37)):结论:RPE 组和目标心率组的患者在 CR 过程中的运动自我效能感没有显著变化。与我们的假设相反,使用 GXT 和目标心率范围并不能减轻恐惧感,我们注意到基线恐惧感升高的患者对运动的恐惧感持续或增加。看来有必要进行更有针对性的心理干预,以减少 CR 中的运动恐惧和自我效能感。
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
5.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (IJBM) is the official scientific journal of the International Society for Behavioral Medicine (ISBM). IJBM seeks to present the best theoretically-driven, evidence-based work in the field of behavioral medicine from around the globe. IJBM embraces multiple theoretical perspectives, research methodologies, groups of interest, and levels of analysis. The journal is interested in research across the broad spectrum of behavioral medicine, including health-behavior relationships, the prevention of illness and the promotion of health, the effects of illness on the self and others, the effectiveness of novel interventions, identification of biobehavioral mechanisms, and the influence of social factors on health. We welcome experimental, non-experimental, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies as well as implementation and dissemination research, integrative reviews, and meta-analyses.
×
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