Mandic Sandra, Tymchak Wayne, Kim Daniel, Daub Bill, Quinney H Arthur, Taylor Dylan, Al-Kurtass Suhaib, Haykowsky Mark J
Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Clin Rehabil. 2009 Mar;23(3):207-16. doi: 10.1177/0269215508095362.
To examined the effects of different training modalities on exercise capacity (Vo( 2peak)), systolic function, muscular strength and endurance and quality of life in heart failure patients.
Randomized controlled trial.
Cardiac rehabilitation centre in Canada.
Forty-two individuals with heart failure (62 +/- 12 years; New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes I-III).
Aerobic training (n = 14), combined aerobic and resistance training (n = 15) or usual care (n = 13) three times per week for 12 weeks.
(1) Vo( 2peak) measured by symptom-limited graded exercise test on cycle ergometer; (2) systolic function assessed by two-dimensional echocardiography; (3) muscular strength and muscular endurance measured by one-repetition maximum procedure; and (4) quality of life assessed by questionnaires.
In the intention-to-treat analysis, neither aerobic nor combined aerobic and resistance training significantly improved Vo(2peak), systolic function or quality of life compared with usual care. However, combined aerobic and resistance training significantly improved upper extremity strength (40.7 (14.0)-48.5 (16.0) kg, P<0.05) and muscular endurance (5.7 (2.7)-11.6 (7.6) reps, P<0.05) compared with aerobic training or usual care. In compliant participants (exercise adherence 80%), Vo(2peak) increased in the aerobic group (16.9 (6.0)-19.0 (6.8), P= 0.026) and tended to increase in the combined training group (15.9 (5.0)-17.6 (5.6), P= 0.058) compared with usual care. Quality of life was improved in the aerobic group only.
Both aerobic and combined aerobic and resistance training are effective interventions to improve Vo(2peak) in compliant heart failure patients. Combined training may be more effective in improving muscle strength and endurance.
研究不同训练方式对心力衰竭患者运动能力(峰值摄氧量)、收缩功能、肌肉力量与耐力以及生活质量的影响。
随机对照试验。
加拿大的心脏康复中心。
42例心力衰竭患者(62±12岁;纽约心脏协会(NYHA)心功能分级I - III级)。
有氧运动组(n = 14)、有氧与抗阻联合训练组(n = 15)或常规护理组(n = 13),每周训练3次,共12周。
(1)通过症状限制递增负荷运动试验在功率自行车上测量峰值摄氧量;(2)采用二维超声心动图评估收缩功能;(3)通过一次重复最大量法测量肌肉力量和肌肉耐力;(4)通过问卷调查评估生活质量。
在意向性分析中,与常规护理相比,有氧运动和有氧与抗阻联合训练均未显著改善峰值摄氧量、收缩功能或生活质量。然而,与有氧运动训练或常规护理相比,有氧与抗阻联合训练显著提高了上肢力量(从40.7(14.0)kg提高至48.5(16.0)kg,P<0.05)和肌肉耐力(从5.7(2.7)次重复提高至11.6(7.6)次重复,P<0.05)。在依从性好的参与者(运动依从性达80%)中,与常规护理相比,有氧运动组的峰值摄氧量增加(从16.9(6.0)提高至19.0(6.8),P = 0.026),联合训练组的峰值摄氧量有增加趋势(从15.9(5.0)提高至17.6(5.6),P = 0.058)。仅有氧运动组的生活质量得到改善。
有氧运动和有氧与抗阻联合训练都是改善依从性好的心力衰竭患者峰值摄氧量的有效干预措施。联合训练在改善肌肉力量和耐力方面可能更有效。