4.4 Article

Physical training and the dynamics of the cardiac baroreflex: A comparison when blood pressure rises and falls

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
卷 76, 期 3, 页码 142-147

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.03.004

关键词

Baroreceptor reflex sensitivity; Baroreceptor effectiveness index; Physical exercise; Inter-beat interval; Blood pressure

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [SEJ2006-09808]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the analysis of baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS) through the sequence method, spontaneous cardiac sequences are sought in which systolic blood pressure (SBP) increases are accompanied by an increase in inter-beat interval (IBI) (up sequences), or in which a decrease in SBP is accompanied by a decrease in IBI (down sequences). The regression line between the SBP and the IBI values produces an estimate of BRS in ms/mm Hg. The up sequences are mainly associated with vagal activation and the down sequences with vagal inhibition. This study evaluated the effect of regular exercise on BRS assessed differentially for the up and down sequences. Thirty two regular exercisers and 27 sedentary students performed a serial arithmetic task after a baseline period. Results show that BRS in the up sequences was greater for the physically active group than for the sedentary group. For the physically active group, BRS in the up sequences was higher than BRS in the down sequences. The arithmetic task produced a significant BRS decrease in the up sequences for the physically active group but not for the sedentary group. These results show that regular exercise modulates the dynamics of the cardiac baroreflex. The differences between the up and down sequences suggest that the physically active group displays high parasympathetic cardiac control and autonomic cardiac adjustment to stressful conditions in which vagal withdrawal plays a key role in the cardiac response. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据