Ben Knox-Brown, Chris Harding, Shabana Chowdhury, Andrew Pritchard, Joanna Shakespeare, Karl Peter Sylvester
{"title":"心肺运动试验中骑车节奏对生理反应的影响。","authors":"Ben Knox-Brown, Chris Harding, Shabana Chowdhury, Andrew Pritchard, Joanna Shakespeare, Karl Peter Sylvester","doi":"10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The impact of cycling at different cadences on cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) measurements is poorly understood. We aimed to investigate whether higher cadences of pedalling led to meaningful changes in physiological endpoints.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study participants were recruited from healthy staff members working within three NHS trusts across England. At baseline, all participants completed a CPET at 60 rpm and then subsequently completed CPETs at cadences of 70, 80 and 90 rpm, allocated in a random order. To evaluate the mean differences in CPET measurements across the cadences, we used a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance. We then performed post hoc pairwise comparisons with Tukey correction to account for multiple testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data collection took place between the 19 September 2023 and 9 April 2024. 25 participants had complete data at each cadence. 48% (12 of 25) were female, with a median (IQR) age of 30 years (27-41). There was no significant difference in peak V̇O<sub>2</sub> across the cadences. Maximum achieved work rate was significantly different across the cadences (p=<0.001). The highest wattage was achieved at 60 rpm (221.2 watts±71.4) and lowest at 90 rpm (210.4 watts, ±77.2). End exercise ventilation increased with increasing cadence (p=0.013), with a mean of 97.6 L/min (±28.3) at 60 prm and 107.0 L/min (±33.9) at 90 prm. Breathing reserve decreased with increasing cadence (p=0.009), with a mean of 45.6 L/min (±28.8) at 60 rpm and 35.1 L/min (±23.5) at 90 rpm. There were minimal differences in other CPET parameters.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In a healthy population, higher cycling cadences increased ventilatory demand and reduced maximum work rate. This could have implications for CPETs in the clinical setting, where physiological responses to higher cadences may be more exaggerated.</p>","PeriodicalId":9048,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12001355/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of cycling cadence on physiological response during a cardiopulmonary exercise test.\",\"authors\":\"Ben Knox-Brown, Chris Harding, Shabana Chowdhury, Andrew Pritchard, Joanna Shakespeare, Karl Peter Sylvester\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002824\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The impact of cycling at different cadences on cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) measurements is poorly understood. We aimed to investigate whether higher cadences of pedalling led to meaningful changes in physiological endpoints.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study participants were recruited from healthy staff members working within three NHS trusts across England. At baseline, all participants completed a CPET at 60 rpm and then subsequently completed CPETs at cadences of 70, 80 and 90 rpm, allocated in a random order. To evaluate the mean differences in CPET measurements across the cadences, we used a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance. We then performed post hoc pairwise comparisons with Tukey correction to account for multiple testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data collection took place between the 19 September 2023 and 9 April 2024. 25 participants had complete data at each cadence. 48% (12 of 25) were female, with a median (IQR) age of 30 years (27-41). There was no significant difference in peak V̇O<sub>2</sub> across the cadences. Maximum achieved work rate was significantly different across the cadences (p=<0.001). The highest wattage was achieved at 60 rpm (221.2 watts±71.4) and lowest at 90 rpm (210.4 watts, ±77.2). End exercise ventilation increased with increasing cadence (p=0.013), with a mean of 97.6 L/min (±28.3) at 60 prm and 107.0 L/min (±33.9) at 90 prm. Breathing reserve decreased with increasing cadence (p=0.009), with a mean of 45.6 L/min (±28.8) at 60 rpm and 35.1 L/min (±23.5) at 90 rpm. There were minimal differences in other CPET parameters.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In a healthy population, higher cycling cadences increased ventilatory demand and reduced maximum work rate. This could have implications for CPETs in the clinical setting, where physiological responses to higher cadences may be more exaggerated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9048,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Respiratory Research\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12001355/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Respiratory Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002824\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002824","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of cycling cadence on physiological response during a cardiopulmonary exercise test.
Introduction: The impact of cycling at different cadences on cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) measurements is poorly understood. We aimed to investigate whether higher cadences of pedalling led to meaningful changes in physiological endpoints.
Methods: Study participants were recruited from healthy staff members working within three NHS trusts across England. At baseline, all participants completed a CPET at 60 rpm and then subsequently completed CPETs at cadences of 70, 80 and 90 rpm, allocated in a random order. To evaluate the mean differences in CPET measurements across the cadences, we used a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance. We then performed post hoc pairwise comparisons with Tukey correction to account for multiple testing.
Results: Data collection took place between the 19 September 2023 and 9 April 2024. 25 participants had complete data at each cadence. 48% (12 of 25) were female, with a median (IQR) age of 30 years (27-41). There was no significant difference in peak V̇O2 across the cadences. Maximum achieved work rate was significantly different across the cadences (p=<0.001). The highest wattage was achieved at 60 rpm (221.2 watts±71.4) and lowest at 90 rpm (210.4 watts, ±77.2). End exercise ventilation increased with increasing cadence (p=0.013), with a mean of 97.6 L/min (±28.3) at 60 prm and 107.0 L/min (±33.9) at 90 prm. Breathing reserve decreased with increasing cadence (p=0.009), with a mean of 45.6 L/min (±28.8) at 60 rpm and 35.1 L/min (±23.5) at 90 rpm. There were minimal differences in other CPET parameters.
Conclusion: In a healthy population, higher cycling cadences increased ventilatory demand and reduced maximum work rate. This could have implications for CPETs in the clinical setting, where physiological responses to higher cadences may be more exaggerated.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Open Respiratory Research is a peer-reviewed, open access journal publishing respiratory and critical care medicine. It is the sister journal to Thorax and co-owned by the British Thoracic Society and BMJ. The journal focuses on robustness of methodology and scientific rigour with less emphasis on novelty or perceived impact. BMJ Open Respiratory Research operates a rapid review process, with continuous publication online, ensuring timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal publishes review articles and all research study types: Basic science including laboratory based experiments and animal models, Pilot studies or proof of concept, Observational studies, Study protocols, Registries, Clinical trials from phase I to multicentre randomised clinical trials, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.