[Comparison of three exercise tests in a group of patients with chronic broncho-pulmonary disease (author's transl)].

P Romero Colomer, F Schrijen
{"title":"[Comparison of three exercise tests in a group of patients with chronic broncho-pulmonary disease (author's transl)].","authors":"P Romero Colomer,&nbsp;F Schrijen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a group of 26 patients with various broncho-pulmonary diseases, the results of three types of exercise were compared : maximum supported power (PMS), maximum supported power + 20 W, and maximum tolerated power (PMT). The two first ones were made at constant power, the last one at increasing power (by 30 W, during three minutes). The comparison of the results indicates that there was no significant difference between the variables measured during PMT and PMS +20 W (power, oxygen uptake, cardiac frequency, oxygen pulse, ventilation). The changes in oxygen uptake, cardiac frequency, and ventilation, as the power increased, were not significantly different in the three types of exercise. In this group of patients, mean PMT was 121 W, mean PMS was 98 W, and the ratio PMS/PMT was thus 81%. To determine PMT first reduced the number of exercise-tests necessary to measure PMS (two or three tests depending on the patient).</p>","PeriodicalId":75638,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin de physio-pathologie respiratoire","volume":"11 2","pages":"203-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1975-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin de physio-pathologie respiratoire","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a group of 26 patients with various broncho-pulmonary diseases, the results of three types of exercise were compared : maximum supported power (PMS), maximum supported power + 20 W, and maximum tolerated power (PMT). The two first ones were made at constant power, the last one at increasing power (by 30 W, during three minutes). The comparison of the results indicates that there was no significant difference between the variables measured during PMT and PMS +20 W (power, oxygen uptake, cardiac frequency, oxygen pulse, ventilation). The changes in oxygen uptake, cardiac frequency, and ventilation, as the power increased, were not significantly different in the three types of exercise. In this group of patients, mean PMT was 121 W, mean PMS was 98 W, and the ratio PMS/PMT was thus 81%. To determine PMT first reduced the number of exercise-tests necessary to measure PMS (two or three tests depending on the patient).

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[一组慢性支气管-肺部疾病患者三种运动试验的比较[作者简介]。
在26例患有各种支气管肺疾病的患者中,比较了三种运动类型的结果:最大支持功率(PMS),最大支持功率+ 20 W和最大耐受功率(PMT)。前两个是在恒定功率下制作的,最后一个是在增加功率(在三分钟内增加30瓦)。结果比较表明,PMT与PMS +20 W期间测量的变量(功率、摄氧量、心跳频率、氧脉冲、通气量)无显著差异。三种运动类型的摄氧量、心跳频率和通气量随功率增加的变化无显著差异。本组患者平均PMT为121 W,平均PMS为98 W, PMS/PMT比值为81%。为了确定PMT,首先减少了测量PMS所需的运动测试次数(根据患者的情况进行两次或三次测试)。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Proteolytic Mechanisms and Pulmonary Emphysema [A method of continuous recording on microsamples of the Hb-O2 association curve. II. A study of Bohr effect and carbamino-formation (author's transl)]. A method of continuous recording on microsamples of the Hb-O2 association curve. I. Technique and direct registration of standard results. [Relationships of seric IgA and s.IgA of bronchial secretions with respiratory pathophysiology (author's transl)]. Respiratory impairment including assessment of disability. Budapest, Hungary, June 22-26, 1975. 1. Summary of the conference.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1