Ross Robert, Myers Jonathan
School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7P 3E8, Canada.
School of Medicine, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA.
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Jan 6;24(1):14. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2401014. eCollection 2023 Jan.
The evidence that cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) predicts morbidity and mortality independent of commonly obtained risk factors is beyond dispute. Observations establishing that the addition of CRF to algorithms for estimating cardiovascular disease risk reinforces the clinical utility of CRF. Evidence suggesting that non-exercise estimations of CRF are associated with all-cause mortality provides an opportunity to obtain estimates of CRF in a cost-effective manner. Together with the observation that CRF is substantially improved in response to exercise consistent with guideline recommendations underscores the position that CRF should be included as a routine measure across all health care settings. Here we provide a brief overview of the evidence in support of this position.
心肺适能（CRF）独立于常见的风险因素预测发病率和死亡率，这一证据无可争议。有观察表明，在估算心血管疾病风险的算法中加入CRF可增强其临床实用性。有证据表明，通过非运动方式估算CRF与全因死亡率相关，这为以经济有效的方式获取CRF估算值提供了契机。再加上有观察发现，按照指南建议进行运动后，CRF会显著改善，这凸显了CRF应作为所有医疗机构常规测量指标的立场。在此，我们简要概述支持这一立场的证据。
