评估呼吸困难程度时应考虑用力程度:一项临床研究。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PHYSIOLOGY
Viktor Elmberg, Gufran Ali, David Gustafsson, Dennis Jensen, Magnus Ekström
{"title":"评估呼吸困难程度时应考虑用力程度:一项临床研究。","authors":"Viktor Elmberg, Gufran Ali, David Gustafsson, Dennis Jensen, Magnus Ekström","doi":"10.1016/j.resp.2025.104398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>Exertional breathlessness is a dominating symptom in cardiorespiratory disease, limiting exercise capacity. Multidimensional measurement has been proposed to capture breathlessness, but it is unknown whether it is useful to differentiate people with abnormal vs normal exertional breathlessness intensity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of outpatients aged ≥ 18 years performing a symptom-limited cycle incremental exercise test (IET). Breathlessness sensations at end of IET were identified using the multidimensional dyspnea profile (MDP) 30-min post-exercise and compared between people with abnormally high breathlessness (Borg 0-10 rating > upper limit of normal [ULN]) and people within normal ranges (≤ ULN) in relation to the percentage of predicted peak power output defined by normative reference equations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 92 participants, 20 (22 %) had abnormally high breathlessness. Compared with those with normal breathlessness (n = 72 [78 %]), the abnormal group reported higher symptom intensity at peak exercise (7.9 ± 1.7 vs 6.3 ± 1.4 Borg units; p < 0.001) and had lower peak power output 129 ± 52 W vs 167 ± 55 W; p < 0.001). Differences between those with normal, and abnormal exertional breathlessness regarding MDP ratings were not statistically significant (all p > 0.05): overall unpleasantness, 4.1 ± 2.3 vs 4.7 ± 1.6; immediate perception, 10.9 ± 2.8 vs 11.5 ± 1.8; and emotional response, 4.1 ± 7.6 vs 3.2 ± 7.5. MDP ratings had no relation to peak power output.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Breathlessness dimensions are similar at the peak of a standardized IET and cannot differentiate between people with normal and abnormally high exertional breathlessness.</p>","PeriodicalId":20961,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","volume":" ","pages":"104398"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breathlessness dimensions should be evaluated in relation to the level of exertion: A clinical study.\",\"authors\":\"Viktor Elmberg, Gufran Ali, David Gustafsson, Dennis Jensen, Magnus Ekström\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resp.2025.104398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>Exertional breathlessness is a dominating symptom in cardiorespiratory disease, limiting exercise capacity. Multidimensional measurement has been proposed to capture breathlessness, but it is unknown whether it is useful to differentiate people with abnormal vs normal exertional breathlessness intensity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of outpatients aged ≥ 18 years performing a symptom-limited cycle incremental exercise test (IET). Breathlessness sensations at end of IET were identified using the multidimensional dyspnea profile (MDP) 30-min post-exercise and compared between people with abnormally high breathlessness (Borg 0-10 rating > upper limit of normal [ULN]) and people within normal ranges (≤ ULN) in relation to the percentage of predicted peak power output defined by normative reference equations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 92 participants, 20 (22 %) had abnormally high breathlessness. Compared with those with normal breathlessness (n = 72 [78 %]), the abnormal group reported higher symptom intensity at peak exercise (7.9 ± 1.7 vs 6.3 ± 1.4 Borg units; p < 0.001) and had lower peak power output 129 ± 52 W vs 167 ± 55 W; p < 0.001). Differences between those with normal, and abnormal exertional breathlessness regarding MDP ratings were not statistically significant (all p > 0.05): overall unpleasantness, 4.1 ± 2.3 vs 4.7 ± 1.6; immediate perception, 10.9 ± 2.8 vs 11.5 ± 1.8; and emotional response, 4.1 ± 7.6 vs 3.2 ± 7.5. MDP ratings had no relation to peak power output.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Breathlessness dimensions are similar at the peak of a standardized IET and cannot differentiate between people with normal and abnormally high exertional breathlessness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"104398\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resp.2025.104398\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resp.2025.104398","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Breathlessness dimensions should be evaluated in relation to the level of exertion: A clinical study.

Background/aim: Exertional breathlessness is a dominating symptom in cardiorespiratory disease, limiting exercise capacity. Multidimensional measurement has been proposed to capture breathlessness, but it is unknown whether it is useful to differentiate people with abnormal vs normal exertional breathlessness intensity.

Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of outpatients aged ≥ 18 years performing a symptom-limited cycle incremental exercise test (IET). Breathlessness sensations at end of IET were identified using the multidimensional dyspnea profile (MDP) 30-min post-exercise and compared between people with abnormally high breathlessness (Borg 0-10 rating > upper limit of normal [ULN]) and people within normal ranges (≤ ULN) in relation to the percentage of predicted peak power output defined by normative reference equations.

Results: Of 92 participants, 20 (22 %) had abnormally high breathlessness. Compared with those with normal breathlessness (n = 72 [78 %]), the abnormal group reported higher symptom intensity at peak exercise (7.9 ± 1.7 vs 6.3 ± 1.4 Borg units; p < 0.001) and had lower peak power output 129 ± 52 W vs 167 ± 55 W; p < 0.001). Differences between those with normal, and abnormal exertional breathlessness regarding MDP ratings were not statistically significant (all p > 0.05): overall unpleasantness, 4.1 ± 2.3 vs 4.7 ± 1.6; immediate perception, 10.9 ± 2.8 vs 11.5 ± 1.8; and emotional response, 4.1 ± 7.6 vs 3.2 ± 7.5. MDP ratings had no relation to peak power output.

Conclusion: Breathlessness dimensions are similar at the peak of a standardized IET and cannot differentiate between people with normal and abnormally high exertional breathlessness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
104
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology (RESPNB) publishes original articles and invited reviews concerning physiology and pathophysiology of respiration in its broadest sense. Although a special focus is on topics in neurobiology, high quality papers in respiratory molecular and cellular biology are also welcome, as are high-quality papers in traditional areas, such as: -Mechanics of breathing- Gas exchange and acid-base balance- Respiration at rest and exercise- Respiration in unusual conditions, like high or low pressure or changes of temperature, low ambient oxygen- Embryonic and adult respiration- Comparative respiratory physiology. Papers on clinical aspects, original methods, as well as theoretical papers are also considered as long as they foster the understanding of respiratory physiology and pathophysiology.
×
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