3.9 Article

Importance of exercise training session duration in the rehabilitation of coronary artery disease patients

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/HJR.0b013e3282fd5c5e

Keywords

heart disease; rehabilitation; session duration

Funding

  1. Hartcentrum Hasselt vzw

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background In cardiac rehabilitation, 40-60-min exercise training sessions are advised. However, because of the increasing coronary artery disease (CAD) prevalence and higher workload for cardiac rehabilitation centres, it remains unclear whether 40-min exercise training sessions are equally effective as 60-min exercise training sessions. Design Prospective randomized clinical trial. Methods One hundred and thirty-four CAD patients were included in a 7-week rehabilitation programme. All patients exercised 3 days per week, at a heart rate corresponding to 65% of baseline peak oxygen uptake W02pe.k)- Patients were randomized in two groups: 40 versus 60-min exercise training sessions. Changes of body anthropometrics, resting haemodynamics, exercise capacity and ventilatory threshold, blood plasma lipid profile and C-reactive protein level were assessed. Results As a result of rehabilitation, exercise capacity, ventilatory threshold, and blood plasma lipid profile improved significantly in the total population (P < 0.05), without differences between subgroups (P>0.05). Body weight and waist circumference decreased significantly in total population (P<0.01), but with a greater magnitude in the 40 versus 60-min exercise session group (P<0.05). Conclusions In the early rehabilitation of CAD patients, 40-min exercise training sessions seem to be at least as effective for improving body anthropometrics, blood plasma lipid profile and exercise capacity, as compared with 60-min exercise training sessions. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 15:453-459 (c) 2008 The European Society of Cardiology

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available