高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Effectiveness and Safety of Four Aerobic Exercise Intensity Prescription Techniques in Rehabilitation Training for Patients with Coronary Heart Disease

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Department of Chronic Disease Management, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, China. [2]Department of Cardiac Function, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, China.
出处:
ISSN:

摘要:
A retrospective study was conducted on all patients with CHD who were admitted to CR and completed cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) in Guangdong Hospital of traditional Chinese medicine. According to the risk stratification method of CHD, all participants were divided into three groups: low, moderate, and high risk. The training target heart rates (HRt) of each participant were calculated according to the formula of heart-rate-reserve (HRR), maximum-heart-rate (MHR), target-heart-rate (THR), and anaerobic threshold (AT) method provided in the guideline. Among them, the HRR method using the maximum-heart-rate obtained by the age formula was named "HRR method A," and that using the actual measured peak heart rate was named "HRR method B." For the three groups, the effectiveness and safety indexes at the target-heart-rate zone set by the different formulas above are counted and compared using CPET data.A total of 324 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between the target-heart-rate set by the HRR method A and AT method among the three groups (P > 0.05). The mean value of HRt set by other methods was lower than the AT heart rate (P < 0.05). The HRt set by the THR method was close to the AT, while that set by the MHR method was the lowest. The frequency of patients whose HRt was set by the MHR method was lower than the AT one, which was the highest. None of the participants had serious adverse events. There were no risks of ECG abnormalities in the low- and moderate-risk groups. The HRR method A had the highest incidence of various risks of ECG abnormalities, while the MHR method had the lowest one, and the safety of the THR method is close to that of the AT method (P < 0.05).The heart rate calculated by HRR method A is more consistent with the actual AT. All four techniques are safe in low- and moderate-risk patients. In high-risk patients, using HRR method A has certain risks. It is recommended to use the MHR method for safety reasons, but its effectiveness is low. If considering both effectiveness and safety, the THR method can be conservatively selected at the beginning of the CR program.Copyright © 2022 Tao Chen et al.

语种:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2021]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 心脏和心血管系统
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 心脏和心血管系统
JCR分区:
出版当年[2020]版:
Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
最新[2023]版:
Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2020版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2019版] 出版后一年[2021版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Department of Chronic Disease Management, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, China.
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:2018 今日访问量:0 总访问量:645 更新日期:2024-07-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 广东省中医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:广州市越秀区大德路111号