埃克布洛姆-巴克自行车测力计测试在心血管疾病患者中的有效性。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.2340/jrm.v56.39901
Magnus Fransplass Storli, Marius Steiro Fimland, Harald Kåre Engan, Jon Arne Sandmæl
{"title":"埃克布洛姆-巴克自行车测力计测试在心血管疾病患者中的有效性。","authors":"Magnus Fransplass Storli, Marius Steiro Fimland, Harald Kåre Engan, Jon Arne Sandmæl","doi":"10.2340/jrm.v56.39901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the validity of the Ekblom-Bak cycle ergometer test in patients with cardiovascular disease admitted to cardiac rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Estimated peak oxygen consumption from the Ekblom-Bak test was compared with directly measured peak oxygen consumption from a treadmill cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients completed the cardiopulmonary exercise test first, followed by the Ekblom-Bak test after 24 h rest. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to establish the correlation between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption, and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement were used to determine the bias between the 2 tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six patients were included in the final analysis. The Ekblom-Bak test significantly overestimated peak oxygen consumption. Agreement between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption was: bias = 4.3 mL/kg/min (limits of agreement: -4.0-12.6 mL/kg/min).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Ekblom-Bak test overestimated peak oxygen consumption to such an extent that it cannot accurately assess cardiorespiratory fitness in patients with cardiovascular disease. Thus, the cardiopulmonary exercise test remains the test of choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":54768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11334349/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of the Ekblom-Bak Cycle Ergometer Test in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Magnus Fransplass Storli, Marius Steiro Fimland, Harald Kåre Engan, Jon Arne Sandmæl\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/jrm.v56.39901\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the validity of the Ekblom-Bak cycle ergometer test in patients with cardiovascular disease admitted to cardiac rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Estimated peak oxygen consumption from the Ekblom-Bak test was compared with directly measured peak oxygen consumption from a treadmill cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients completed the cardiopulmonary exercise test first, followed by the Ekblom-Bak test after 24 h rest. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to establish the correlation between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption, and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement were used to determine the bias between the 2 tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six patients were included in the final analysis. The Ekblom-Bak test significantly overestimated peak oxygen consumption. Agreement between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption was: bias = 4.3 mL/kg/min (limits of agreement: -4.0-12.6 mL/kg/min).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Ekblom-Bak test overestimated peak oxygen consumption to such an extent that it cannot accurately assess cardiorespiratory fitness in patients with cardiovascular disease. Thus, the cardiopulmonary exercise test remains the test of choice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11334349/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v56.39901\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v56.39901","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估 Ekblom-Bak 循环测力计测试在接受心脏康复治疗的心血管疾病患者中的有效性:方法:将埃克布洛姆-巴克测试估计的峰值耗氧量与跑步机心肺运动测试直接测量的峰值耗氧量进行比较。患者首先完成心肺运动测试,休息 24 小时后再进行埃克布洛姆-巴克测试。皮尔逊相关系数(r)用于确定估计峰值耗氧量与测量峰值耗氧量之间的相关性,布兰德-阿尔特曼图(Bland-Altman plots)与一致性界限用于确定两种测试之间的偏差:最终分析包括 26 名患者。Ekblom-Bak测试明显高估了峰值耗氧量。估计峰值耗氧量与测量峰值耗氧量之间的一致性为:偏差 = 4.3 mL/kg/min(一致性范围:-4.0-12.6 mL/kg/min):结论:Ekblom-Bak 测试高估了峰值耗氧量,以至于无法准确评估心血管疾病患者的心肺功能。因此,心肺运动测试仍是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Validity of the Ekblom-Bak Cycle Ergometer Test in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.

Objective: To assess the validity of the Ekblom-Bak cycle ergometer test in patients with cardiovascular disease admitted to cardiac rehabilitation.

Methods: Estimated peak oxygen consumption from the Ekblom-Bak test was compared with directly measured peak oxygen consumption from a treadmill cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients completed the cardiopulmonary exercise test first, followed by the Ekblom-Bak test after 24 h rest. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to establish the correlation between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption, and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement were used to determine the bias between the 2 tests.

Results: Twenty-six patients were included in the final analysis. The Ekblom-Bak test significantly overestimated peak oxygen consumption. Agreement between estimated and measured peak oxygen consumption was: bias = 4.3 mL/kg/min (limits of agreement: -4.0-12.6 mL/kg/min).

Conclusion: The Ekblom-Bak test overestimated peak oxygen consumption to such an extent that it cannot accurately assess cardiorespiratory fitness in patients with cardiovascular disease. Thus, the cardiopulmonary exercise test remains the test of choice.

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
5.60
自引率
5.70%
发文量
102
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine is an international peer-review journal published in English, with at least 10 issues published per year. Original articles, reviews, case reports, short communications, special reports and letters to the editor are published, as also are editorials and book reviews. The journal strives to provide its readers with a variety of topics, including: functional assessment and intervention studies, clinical studies in various patient groups, methodology in physical and rehabilitation medicine, epidemiological studies on disabling conditions and reports on vocational and sociomedical aspects of rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy observation of combined transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation on gait in 169 subacute stroke patients. Ambulation recovery prediction after hip fracture surgery using the Hip Fracture Short-Term Ambulation Prediction tool. Screening cutoff values to identify the risk of falls after stroke: A scoping review. Risk-taking behaviour and executive functions, a major component of the risk of fall factors after recent stroke. The effects of rehabilitation potential on activities of daily living in patients with stroke in Taiwan: a prospective longitudinal study.
×
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