Functional capacity was significantly lower during bicycle exercise compared to combined treadmill testing (8.1 vs. 9.8 METs), although the two modalities were highly correlated (r = 0.90).
Cross-Sectional (n=262)
Does functional capacity differ between bicycle exercise radionuclide angiography and treadmill exercise testing?
Functional capacity measured during bicycle exercise is significantly lower than during treadmill testing, but treadmill METs can be accurately predicted from bicycle METs using specific equations.
Effect estimate: r = 0.90
Absolute Event Rate: 8.1% vs 9.8%
This study compared functional capacity during treadmill exercise testing and during bicycle exercise radionuclide angiography. 262 patients performed maximal upright bicycle exercise and also performed maximal graded exercise testing using either the Bruce (n = 158) or Naughton (n = 104) treadmill protocols. The functional capacity was well correlated between bicycle and treadmill for Bruce (r = 0.89), Naughton (r = 0.93), or combined treadmill (r = 0.90) protocols. However, the functional capacity was significantly lower during bicycle than during treadmill testing for Bruce (8.3 vs. 10.5 METs), Naughton (7.8 vs. 8.7 METs), or combined treadmill (8.1 vs. 9.8 METs) protocols. Treadmill functional capacity could be predicted from bicycle functional capacity using the following equations: Bruce METs = 1.00 X (bike METs) + 2.23, Naughton METs = 0.94 X (bike METs) + 1.40, and combined treadmill METs = 0.98 X (bike METs) + 1.85.
Foster et al. (Fri,) reported a cross-sectional. Bicycle exercise radionuclide angiography vs. Treadmill exercise testing (Bruce or Naughton protocols) was evaluated on Functional capacity (METs) (r = 0.90). Functional capacity was significantly lower during bicycle exercise compared to combined treadmill testing (8.1 vs. 9.8 METs), although the two modalities were highly correlated (r = 0.90).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: