Adeniyi Mayowa Jeremiah, Awosika Ayoola
Departments of Physiology, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Federal University of Health Sciences, Otukpo, Benue 972261, Nigeria.
Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Peoria, Bloomington, Illinois 61606, United States of America.
J Biol Methods. 2025 Aug 1;12(3):e99010068. doi: 10.14440/jbm.2024.0127. eCollection 2025.
Recovery pulse rate (RPR) and other cardiovascular indices - such as heart rate variability and blood pressure recovery - are underutilized tools in assessing autonomic and cardiovascular adaptability to orthostasis. While orthostatic hypotension is well-documented, the prognostic significance of delayed heart rate recovery and impaired autonomic compensation remains insufficiently explored. Emerging evidence suggests that abnormal RPR may predict cardiovascular morbidity and autonomic dysfunction; however, standardized clinical guidelines for its interpretation are lacking. Bridging this gap could enhance early detection of dysautonomia and cardiovascular risk stratification.
This study aimed to examine the pattern of RPR and cardiovascular function indices in healthy young female adults following 10 min of upright standing.
This study evaluated post-orthostatic cardiovascular indices, including RPR measured at two intervals: 10 - 20 s and 21 - 31 s after returning to a reclining sitting position. A total of 35 healthy females were selected for the study, and appropriate inclusion was duly considered. Blood pressure, pulse rate, and other parameters were measured at baseline, after 10 min of standing, and after returning to a reclining sitting position using standard procedures. The first and second RPRs were calculated as the difference between the orthostatic pulse rate and the pulse rate measured during the two intervals, respectively, after returning to a reclining sitting position.
There was no significant difference between the first and second RPRs. Among the cardiovascular parameters, only systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure measured after the second RPR were significantly higher than baseline values. In addition, neither the first nor the second RPR correlated with body weight, height, or body mass index.
No significant difference was found in autonomic response during the 10 - 20 s and 21 - 31 s post-orthostatic periods in young adult females. Incorporating RPR and related indices into clinical practice provides a non-invasive, cost-effective method to identify and monitor autonomic and cardiovascular dysfunction. This can guide therapeutic strategies, such as fluid management, exercise rehabilitation, or pharmacological interventions, tailored to improve autonomic balance and cardiovascular resilience.
恢复脉率（RPR）以及其他心血管指标——如心率变异性和血压恢复——在评估自主神经系统和心血管系统对直立姿势的适应性方面是未得到充分利用的工具。虽然体位性低血压有充分的文献记载，但心率恢复延迟和自主神经代偿受损的预后意义仍未得到充分探讨。新出现的证据表明，异常的RPR可能预示心血管疾病和自主神经功能障碍；然而，缺乏用于解释它的标准化临床指南。弥合这一差距可以加强对自主神经功能障碍的早期检测和心血管风险分层。
本研究旨在检查健康年轻成年女性在直立站立10分钟后的RPR模式和心血管功能指标。
本研究评估体位性低血压后的心血管指标，包括在恢复斜躺坐姿后两个时间段（10 - 20秒和21 - 31秒）测量的RPR。总共35名健康女性被选入本研究，并适当考虑了纳入标准。使用标准程序在基线、站立10分钟后以及恢复斜躺坐姿后测量血压、脉率和其他参数。第一次和第二次RPR分别计算为恢复斜躺坐姿后体位性脉率与两个时间段测量的脉率之间的差值。
第一次和第二次RPR之间无显著差异。在心血管参数中，仅第二次RPR后测量的收缩压和脉压显著高于基线值。此外，第一次和第二次RPR均与体重、身高或体重指数无关。
在年轻成年女性体位性低血压后的10 - 20秒和21 - 31秒期间，自主神经反应未发现显著差异。将RPR及相关指标纳入临床实践提供了一种非侵入性、具有成本效益的方法来识别和监测自主神经和心血管功能障碍。这可以指导治疗策略，如液体管理、运动康复或药物干预，以改善自主神经平衡和心血管弹性。
