Nicola S. Diciolla PT, M.Sc. , Patrícia Rebelo PT, M.Sc. , Guilherme Rodrigues PT, M.Sc. , Ana Sofia Grave PT, M.Sc. , Cíntia Dias PT, M.Sc. , Maria Gomes PT, M.Sc. , E. Samuel Santos PT, M.Sc. , Zulmira Pereira Eng, M.Sc. , Luísa Pereira Eng, Ph.D. , Alda Marques PT, Ph.D., Prof.
{"title":"验证 \"CENTR(AR) \"步行路径：不同的实地标准不会导致慢性阻塞性肺病患者的运动强度不同","authors":"Nicola S. Diciolla PT, M.Sc. , Patrícia Rebelo PT, M.Sc. , Guilherme Rodrigues PT, M.Sc. , Ana Sofia Grave PT, M.Sc. , Cíntia Dias PT, M.Sc. , Maria Gomes PT, M.Sc. , E. Samuel Santos PT, M.Sc. , Zulmira Pereira Eng, M.Sc. , Luísa Pereira Eng, Ph.D. , Alda Marques PT, Ph.D., Prof.","doi":"10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.04.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Validating walking trails is essential to promote physical activity (PA) safely and confidently in people with COPD.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We aimed to validate predetermined light, moderate, and vigorous intensities of walking trails in people with COPD.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional study included individuals with COPD walking in predetermined light, moderate and vigorous intensity trails. Activity intensity and volume outcomes were collected. Dyspnoea and fatigue (modified Borg scale), energy expenditure (EE, Sensewear), heart rate (HR, HR monitor), time spent in different PA intensities, and cadence (ActiGraph) were recorded and used to classify PA intensity.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty people with COPD [71(7) years, 80 % male, FEV<sub>1</sub>%predicted 65.6(11.6)] were included. Fatigue differed significantly between light and moderate [3.0(2.0;4.0) vs 3.4(2.5;4.5), <em>p</em> = 0.01], but not vigorous (3.5[2.5–4.0]) tracks. Dyspnoea [2.3(1.5) vs 2.7(1.6) vs 2.6(1.4)], EE [5.1(0.8) vs 4.9(0.5) vs 4.6(0.8) METs], HR [92.5(11.1) vs 93.7(18.6) vs 95.4(15.0) beats/min] and cadence [115.1(104.0;120.3) vs 104.7(99.6;117.6) vs 111.2(99.9;118.5) steps/min] were similar across trails (<em>p</em> > 0.05). Time spent in light and moderate PA, EE volume, walking time, and step count increased along with the proposed intensity levels (<em>p</em> < 0.01). Walking trails were categorised as moderate intensity in most participants.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Walking trails were safe and valid for practising moderate-intensity PA in people with COPD. Participants adjusted their physiological responses and perceived symptoms to match a moderate intensity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55064,"journal":{"name":"Heart & Lung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147956324000682/pdfft?md5=7794639e1def1bd3df689db6f80e73df&pid=1-s2.0-S0147956324000682-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of \\\"CENTR(AR)\\\" walking trails: Different field criteria do not lead to different physical activity intensities in people with COPD\",\"authors\":\"Nicola S. Diciolla PT, M.Sc. , Patrícia Rebelo PT, M.Sc. , Guilherme Rodrigues PT, M.Sc. , Ana Sofia Grave PT, M.Sc. , Cíntia Dias PT, M.Sc. , Maria Gomes PT, M.Sc. , E. Samuel Santos PT, M.Sc. , Zulmira Pereira Eng, M.Sc. , Luísa Pereira Eng, Ph.D. , Alda Marques PT, Ph.D., Prof.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.04.014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Validating walking trails is essential to promote physical activity (PA) safely and confidently in people with COPD.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We aimed to validate predetermined light, moderate, and vigorous intensities of walking trails in people with COPD.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional study included individuals with COPD walking in predetermined light, moderate and vigorous intensity trails. Activity intensity and volume outcomes were collected. Dyspnoea and fatigue (modified Borg scale), energy expenditure (EE, Sensewear), heart rate (HR, HR monitor), time spent in different PA intensities, and cadence (ActiGraph) were recorded and used to classify PA intensity.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty people with COPD [71(7) years, 80 % male, FEV<sub>1</sub>%predicted 65.6(11.6)] were included. Fatigue differed significantly between light and moderate [3.0(2.0;4.0) vs 3.4(2.5;4.5), <em>p</em> = 0.01], but not vigorous (3.5[2.5–4.0]) tracks. Dyspnoea [2.3(1.5) vs 2.7(1.6) vs 2.6(1.4)], EE [5.1(0.8) vs 4.9(0.5) vs 4.6(0.8) METs], HR [92.5(11.1) vs 93.7(18.6) vs 95.4(15.0) beats/min] and cadence [115.1(104.0;120.3) vs 104.7(99.6;117.6) vs 111.2(99.9;118.5) steps/min] were similar across trails (<em>p</em> > 0.05). Time spent in light and moderate PA, EE volume, walking time, and step count increased along with the proposed intensity levels (<em>p</em> < 0.01). Walking trails were categorised as moderate intensity in most participants.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Walking trails were safe and valid for practising moderate-intensity PA in people with COPD. Participants adjusted their physiological responses and perceived symptoms to match a moderate intensity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart & Lung\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147956324000682/pdfft?md5=7794639e1def1bd3df689db6f80e73df&pid=1-s2.0-S0147956324000682-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart & Lung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147956324000682\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart & Lung","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147956324000682","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景验证步行路径对促进慢性阻塞性肺病患者安全、自信地进行体育锻炼（PA）至关重要。方法这项横断面研究包括慢性阻塞性肺病患者在预先确定的轻度、中度和剧烈强度的步行路径上行走。收集了活动强度和活动量的结果。记录呼吸困难和疲劳（改良博格量表）、能量消耗（EE，Sensewear）、心率（HR，HR 监测器）、在不同运动强度下所花费的时间以及步频（ActiGraph），并用于对运动强度进行分类。结果20 名慢性阻塞性肺病患者[71（7）岁，80% 为男性，FEV1% 预测值为 65.6（11.6）]被纳入研究。轻度和中度[3.0(2.0;4.0) vs 3.4(2.5;4.5)，p = 0.01]，但剧烈(3.5[2.5-4.0])运动之间的疲劳程度差异明显。呼吸困难[2.3(1.5) vs 2.7(1.6) vs 2.6(1.4)]、EE[5.1(0.8) vs 4.9(0.5) vs 4.6(0.8) METs]、心率[92.5(11.1) vs 93.7(18.6) vs 95.4(15. 0)次/分]和体力消耗[2.3(1.5) vs 2.7(1.6) vs 2.6(1.4)] 。0）次/分] 和步频[115.1（104.0;120.3） vs 104.7（99.6;117.6） vs 111.2（99.9;118.5）步/分]在不同路径上相似（p >0.05）。参与轻度和中度运动的时间、EE 量、步行时间和步数随着所建议的强度水平而增加（p < 0.01）。结论：步行路径对慢性阻塞性肺病患者进行中等强度的体育锻炼既安全又有效。参与者调整了自己的生理反应和感知症状，以适应中等强度。
Validation of "CENTR(AR)" walking trails: Different field criteria do not lead to different physical activity intensities in people with COPD
Background
Validating walking trails is essential to promote physical activity (PA) safely and confidently in people with COPD.
Objectives
We aimed to validate predetermined light, moderate, and vigorous intensities of walking trails in people with COPD.
Methods
This cross-sectional study included individuals with COPD walking in predetermined light, moderate and vigorous intensity trails. Activity intensity and volume outcomes were collected. Dyspnoea and fatigue (modified Borg scale), energy expenditure (EE, Sensewear), heart rate (HR, HR monitor), time spent in different PA intensities, and cadence (ActiGraph) were recorded and used to classify PA intensity.
Results
Twenty people with COPD [71(7) years, 80 % male, FEV1%predicted 65.6(11.6)] were included. Fatigue differed significantly between light and moderate [3.0(2.0;4.0) vs 3.4(2.5;4.5), p = 0.01], but not vigorous (3.5[2.5–4.0]) tracks. Dyspnoea [2.3(1.5) vs 2.7(1.6) vs 2.6(1.4)], EE [5.1(0.8) vs 4.9(0.5) vs 4.6(0.8) METs], HR [92.5(11.1) vs 93.7(18.6) vs 95.4(15.0) beats/min] and cadence [115.1(104.0;120.3) vs 104.7(99.6;117.6) vs 111.2(99.9;118.5) steps/min] were similar across trails (p > 0.05). Time spent in light and moderate PA, EE volume, walking time, and step count increased along with the proposed intensity levels (p < 0.01). Walking trails were categorised as moderate intensity in most participants.
Conclusion
Walking trails were safe and valid for practising moderate-intensity PA in people with COPD. Participants adjusted their physiological responses and perceived symptoms to match a moderate intensity.
期刊介绍：
Heart & Lung: The Journal of Cardiopulmonary and Acute Care, the official publication of The American Association of Heart Failure Nurses, presents original, peer-reviewed articles on techniques, advances, investigations, and observations related to the care of patients with acute and critical illness and patients with chronic cardiac or pulmonary disorders.
The Journal''s acute care articles focus on the care of hospitalized patients, including those in the critical and acute care settings. Because most patients who are hospitalized in acute and critical care settings have chronic conditions, we are also interested in the chronically critically ill, the care of patients with chronic cardiopulmonary disorders, their rehabilitation, and disease prevention. The Journal''s heart failure articles focus on all aspects of the care of patients with this condition. Manuscripts that are relevant to populations across the human lifespan are welcome.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
