Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/29559
Title: Exercise training intensity determination in cardiovascular rehabilitation: Should the guidelines be reconsidered?
Authors: HANSEN, Dominique 
Bonné, Kim
Alders, Toon
Hermans, Ann
COPERMANS, Katrien 
Swinnen, Hans
Maris, Vincent
Jansegers, Thomas
Mathijs, Wout
Haenen, Laura
Vaes, Johan
Govaerts, Emmanuela
Reenaers, Veerle
FREDERIX, Ines 
DENDALE, Paul 
Issue Date: 2019
Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
Source: European journal of preventive cardiology (Print), 26(18), p. 1921-1928.
Abstract: Aims: In the rehabilitation of cardiovascular disease patients a correct determination of the endurance-type exercise intensity is important to generate health benefits and preserve medical safety. It remains to be assessed whether the guideline-based exercise intensity domains are internally consistent and agree with physiological responses to exercise in cardiovascular disease patients. Methods: A total of 272 cardiovascular disease patients without pacemaker executed a maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test on bike (peak respiratory gas exchange ratio >1.09), to assess peak heart rate (HRpeak), oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and cycling power output (Wpeak). The first and second ventilatory threshold (VT1 and VT2, respectively) was determined and extrapolated to %VO2peak, %HRpeak, %heart rate reserve (%HRR) and %Wpeak for comparison with guideline-based exercise intensity domains. Results: VT1 was noted at 62 10% VO2peak, 75 10% HRpeak, 42 14% HRR and 47 11% Wpeak, corresponding to the high intensity exercise domain (for %VO2peak and %HRpeak) or low intensity exercise domain (for %Wpeak and %HRR). VT2 was noted at 84 9% VO2peak, 88 8% HRpeak, 74 15% HRR and 76 11% Wpeak, corresponding to the high intensity exercise domain (for %HRR and %Wpeak) or very hard exercise domain (for %HRpeak and %VO2peak). At best (when using %Wpeak) in only 63% and 72% of all patients VT1 and VT2, respectively, corresponded to the same guideline-based exercise intensity domain, but this dropped to about 48% and 52% at worst (when using %HRR and %HRpeak, respectively). In particular, the patient’s VO2peak related to differently elicited guideline-based exercise intensity domains (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The guideline-based exercise intensity domains for cardiovascular disease patients seem inconsistent, thus reiterating the need for adjustment.
Keywords: Cardiovascular rehabilitation;exercise intensity;guidelines
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/29559
ISSN: 2047-4873
e-ISSN: 2047-4881
DOI: 10.1177/2047487319859450
ISI #: WOS:000503270700004
Rights: The European Society of Cardiology 2019
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validations: ecoom 2020
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hansen2019.pdf
  Restricted Access
Published version250.48 kBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Exercise intensity in cardiovascular rehabilitation R1.pdfPeer-reviewed author version310.79 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

6
checked on Sep 2, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

48
checked on Mar 29, 2024

Page view(s)

108
checked on Jul 15, 2022

Download(s)

636
checked on Jul 15, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.