Assessing the repeatability of expiratory flow limitation during incremental exercise in healthy adults.

IF 2.2 Q3 PHYSIOLOGY Physiological Reports Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.14814/phy2.70068
Jack R Dunsford, Jasvir K Dhaliwal, Gracie O Grift, Robert Pryce, Paolo B Dominelli, Yannick Molgat-Seon
{"title":"Assessing the repeatability of expiratory flow limitation during incremental exercise in healthy adults.","authors":"Jack R Dunsford, Jasvir K Dhaliwal, Gracie O Grift, Robert Pryce, Paolo B Dominelli, Yannick Molgat-Seon","doi":"10.14814/phy2.70068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We sought to determine the repeatability of EFL in healthy adults during incremental cycle exercise. We hypothesized that the repeatability of EFL would be \"strong\" when assessed as a binary variable (i.e., absent or present) but \"poor\" when assessed as a continuous variable (i.e., % tidal volume overlap). Thirty-two healthy adults performed spirometry and an incremental cycle exercise test to exhaustion on two occasions. Standard cardiorespiratory variables were measured at rest and throughout exercise, and EFL was assessed by overlaying tidal expiratory flow-volume and maximal expiratory flow-volume curves. The repeatability of EFL was determined using Cohen's κ for binary assessments of EFL and intraclass correlation (ICC) for continuous measures of EFL. During exercise, n = 12 participants (38%) experienced EFL. At peak exercise, the repeatability of EFL was \"minimal\" (κ = 0.337, p = 0.145) when assessed as a binary variable and \"poor\" when measured as a continuous variable (ICC = 0.338, p = 0.025). At matched levels of minute ventilation during high-intensity exercise (i.e., >75% of peak oxygen uptake), the repeatability of EFL was \"weak\" when measured as a binary variable (κ = 0.474, p = 0.001) and \"moderate\" when measured as a continuous variable (ICC = 0.603, p < 0.001). Our results highlight the day-to-day variability associated with assessing EFL during exercise in healthy adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":20083,"journal":{"name":"Physiological Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446834/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiological Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.70068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We sought to determine the repeatability of EFL in healthy adults during incremental cycle exercise. We hypothesized that the repeatability of EFL would be "strong" when assessed as a binary variable (i.e., absent or present) but "poor" when assessed as a continuous variable (i.e., % tidal volume overlap). Thirty-two healthy adults performed spirometry and an incremental cycle exercise test to exhaustion on two occasions. Standard cardiorespiratory variables were measured at rest and throughout exercise, and EFL was assessed by overlaying tidal expiratory flow-volume and maximal expiratory flow-volume curves. The repeatability of EFL was determined using Cohen's κ for binary assessments of EFL and intraclass correlation (ICC) for continuous measures of EFL. During exercise, n = 12 participants (38%) experienced EFL. At peak exercise, the repeatability of EFL was "minimal" (κ = 0.337, p = 0.145) when assessed as a binary variable and "poor" when measured as a continuous variable (ICC = 0.338, p = 0.025). At matched levels of minute ventilation during high-intensity exercise (i.e., >75% of peak oxygen uptake), the repeatability of EFL was "weak" when measured as a binary variable (κ = 0.474, p = 0.001) and "moderate" when measured as a continuous variable (ICC = 0.603, p < 0.001). Our results highlight the day-to-day variability associated with assessing EFL during exercise in healthy adults.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估健康成年人在增量运动中呼气流量限制的可重复性。
我们试图确定健康成年人在增量自行车运动中 EFL 的可重复性。我们假设,如果将 EFL 评估为二元变量(即不存在或存在),其可重复性会很 "强",但如果将其评估为连续变量(即潮气量重叠百分比),其可重复性会很 "差"。32 名健康成年人两次进行了肺活量测定和增量循环运动测试。在休息和整个运动过程中测量标准心肺变量,并通过叠加潮气呼气流量-容积和最大呼气流量-容积曲线来评估 EFL。对二元评估的 EFL 采用 Cohen's κ,对连续测量的 EFL 采用类内相关性 (ICC) 来确定 EFL 的可重复性。在运动过程中,n = 12 名参与者(38%)出现了 EFL。在峰值运动时,如果以二元变量评估,EFL 的可重复性为 "极小"(κ = 0.337,p = 0.145);如果以连续变量测量,则为 "差"(ICC = 0.338,p = 0.025)。在高强度运动(即>75%峰值摄氧量)期间,在匹配的分钟通气量水平下,如果以二元变量(κ = 0.474,p = 0.001)进行测量,EFL 的可重复性为 "弱";如果以连续变量(ICC = 0.603,p = 0.001)进行测量,EFL 的可重复性为 "中"。
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
Physiological Reports
Physiological Reports PHYSIOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
374
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Physiological Reports is an online only, open access journal that will publish peer reviewed research across all areas of basic, translational, and clinical physiology and allied disciplines. Physiological Reports is a collaboration between The Physiological Society and the American Physiological Society, and is therefore in a unique position to serve the international physiology community through quick time to publication while upholding a quality standard of sound research that constitutes a useful contribution to the field.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the impact of occupational exposure: A study on cardiovascular autonomic functions of male gas station attendants in Sri Lanka. Physiologists as medical scientists: An early warning from the German academic system. Examining the effect of salbutamol use in ozone air pollution by people with exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Reverse epidemiology of obesity paradox: Fact or fiction? Spinal pain prevalence and associated determinants: A population-based study using the National Survey for Wales.
×
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