Physiotherapy Department, School of Sciences and Technologies, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Presidente Prudente, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Physical Education, School of Sciences and Technologies, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Presidente Prudente, São Paulo, Brazil.
Clin Rehabil. 2021 May;35(5):775-784. doi: 10.1177/0269215520978499. Epub 2020 Dec 8.
This study evaluated the capacity of cardiac risk stratification protocols on simple complications that occur during activities of a cardiovascular rehabilitation program.
Observational longitudinal cohort study.
Outpatient clinic of cardiovascular rehabilitation.
Patients diagnosed with cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors.
Not applicable.
The relationship between the cardiac risk classes of seven risk stratification protocols and the occurrence of simple complications (such angina, abnormal changes in blood pressure, arrhythmias, fatigue, muscle pain, pallor) was assessed using the chi-square test, and when statistical significance was observed, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were determined.
About 76 patients were analyzed. The American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (AACVPR) protocol showed a statistically significant relationship between simple complications and cardiac risk classes (-value = 0.046), however the results of sensitivity (0.53), specificity (0.52), and accuracy (0.53) were not significant. The other protocols analyzed were not significant: American College of Sports Medicine (-value = 0.801), Brazilian Society of Cardiology (-value = 0.734), American Heart Association (-value = 0.957), Pashkow (-value = 0.790), Society French Cardiology (-value = 0.314), and Spanish Society of Cardiology (-value = 0.078).
The AACVPR protocol showed a significant relationship between the risk classes and the occurrence of simple complications, however, the low values obtained for sensitivity, specificity and accuracy show that it is not useful for this purpose.
NCT03446742.
本研究评估了心脏风险分层方案对心血管康复计划活动中发生的简单并发症的能力。
观察性纵向队列研究。
心血管康复门诊。
诊断为心血管疾病和/或危险因素的患者。
不适用。
使用卡方检验评估七种风险分层方案的心脏风险等级与简单并发症(如心绞痛、血压异常变化、心律失常、疲劳、肌肉疼痛、苍白)的发生之间的关系,当观察到统计学意义时,确定灵敏度、特异性和准确性。
约 76 名患者进行了分析。美国心血管和肺康复协会(AACVPR)方案显示简单并发症与心脏风险等级之间存在统计学显著关系(-值=0.046),但灵敏度(0.53)、特异性(0.52)和准确性(0.53)的结果并不显著。分析的其他方案没有统计学意义:美国运动医学学院(-值=0.801)、巴西心脏病学会(-值=0.734)、美国心脏协会(-值=0.957)、Pashkow(-值=0.790)、法国心脏病学会(-值=0.314)和西班牙心脏病学会(-值=0.078)。
AACVPR 方案显示风险等级与简单并发症的发生之间存在显著关系,但灵敏度、特异性和准确性值较低表明其不适用于此目的。
NCT03446742。