Key result
Power-force-velocity customized cardiac rehab drives ~11% greater VO2 peak improvement vs conventional rehab in CAD.
Why the study?
Optimizing individualized cardiac rehabilitation training programmes remains a major challenge in CAD, and assessing the power-force-velocity profile may allow better personalization.
Does cardiac rehabilitation customized based on power–force–velocity profile improve cardiorespiratory capacities in patients with coronary artery disease compared to conventional rehabilitation?
Does cardiac rehabilitation customized based on power–force–velocity profile improve cardiorespiratory capacities in patients with coronary artery disease compared to conventional rehabilitation?
Customizing cardiac rehabilitation based on individual power–force–velocity profiles yields greater improvements in cardiorespiratory capacity and LDL cholesterol reduction than conventional rehabilitation in CAD patients.
Aims Individually optimizing the training programme of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains a major concern among coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. The power–force–velocity profile (PFVP) for a given task is usually assessed to improve performance in athletes through individualized training. Therefore, assessing PFVP on stationary cycle ergometer may allow better personalization of CR programme. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of a new CR customized based on patient’s PFVP vs. a traditional CR in CAD patients on cardiorespiratory, biological, and muscular systems. Methods and results A total of 86 patients participated in this study. The 3-week intervention consisted of physical training sessions (4/week) and therapeutic education workshops (1/week). Experimental group patients followed a specific cycle ergometer training programme focusing on their less developed PFVP quality. Control patients attended a conventional CR programme. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (VO2 at the first ventilatory threshold, VT1, and the peak), blood tests [LDL and HDL cholesterol (LDL-C and HDL-C)], and handgrip and quadriceps force were assessed at baseline and after CR. The mean age was 60.8 ± 9.6 years, and 15% were women. A significantly greater benefit in VO2 peak (experimental: +21.5 ± 19.2% vs. control: +10.5 ± 15.8%, P < 0.001), VO2 at VT1 (experimental: +35.5 ± 33.6% vs. control: +8.4 ± 31.2%, P < 0.001), and LDL-C (P = 0.001) were observed in the experimental group. Both groups significantly increased HDL-C and muscle parameters. Conclusion The novel CR, based on initial individual PFVP performed on stationary cycle ergometer, showed greater benefits on cardiorespiratory capacities and lipid profile than a conventional, non-individualized CR. Therefore, PFVP could be used in CR to adapt specifically the content of training sessions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fanget et al. (2025) studied Coronary artery disease (n=86). PFVP-customized cardiac rehabilitation vs. Conventional cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on VO2 peak (p=<0.001). Cardiac rehabilitation customized by power-force-velocity profile significantly improved VO2 peak compared to conventional rehabilitation (+21.5% vs. +10.5%, P<0.001) in coronary artery disease patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: