Key result
Heart Rate Index equation accurately estimates peak VO2, avoiding ~26% overprediction by standard equations.
Why the study?
Heart rate index had not been established as a surrogate for measured or estimated peak oxygen uptake during cycle ergometry or treadmill testing.
Does the heart rate index (HRI) equation accurately estimate peak VO2 compared to measured VO2peak and currently used estimation equations in patients undergoing exercise testing?
Systematic Review (n=353,208)
Does the heart rate index (HRI) equation accurately estimate peak VO2 compared to measured VO2peak and currently used estimation equations in patients undergoing exercise testing?
Absolute Event Rate: 7.08% vs 7.15%
p-value: p=0.833
The Heart Rate Index (HRI) equation provides a more accurate estimation of peak VO2 than currently used exercise-based equations, closely matching measured VO2peak.
May warrant HRI equation adoption for accurate peak VO2 estimation in exercise testing; extends validation to large meta-analysis.
PURPOSE: Heart rate (HR)-derived variables (HR reserve [HR peak - HR rest ], chronotropic indices [attenuated HR response to exercise], HR recovery [attenuated HR response to exercise recovery], and peak HR index [HR peak /HR rest ]) together with peak oxygen uptake (VO 2peak ) are potential prognostic variables for cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. However, heart rate index (HRI) has not been established as a surrogate for VO 2peak , whether measured (Meas) or estimated (Est), during cycle ergometry (CE) and/or treadmill testing (TT). METHODS: HR-derived prognostic variables to assess cardiovascular outcomes were identified from 150 studies obtained from MEDLINE and Google Scholar searches. The Meas CE/TT-VO 2peak was reported in 81 studies (21 773 participants) and Est CE/TT-VO 2peak in 69 studies (331 435 participants). Using the HRI equation with metabolic equivalent (METs) = 6 × HRI - 5 (where HRI = peak HR/resting HR), HRI-VO 2peak was calculated from HR data reported in the 150 studies. The HRI-VO 2peak was then compared against group mean data for both Meas CE/TT-VO 2peak and Est CE/TT-VO 2peak . RESULTS: The difference between Meas CE/TT-VO 2peak and HRI-VO 2peak was 1% (7.15 ± 3.25 METs vs 7.08 ± 3.02 METs [ P = .833], respectively). By comparison, the difference between Est CE/TT-VO 2peak and HRI-VO 2peak was 25.6% (8.94 ± 2.36 METs vs 7.12 ± 2.27 METs [ P < .001], respectively). Moreover, HRI equation estimation of VO 2peak showed greater overprediction for TT, 26.6%, than for CE, 11.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The Meas-VO 2peak and HRI-VO 2peak agreed closely. When compared with HRI-VO 2peak , Est-VO 2peak from currently used exercise-based equations shows significant overprediction. Use of HRI and/or Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database (FRIEND) registry equations warrant consideration for more accurately estimating VO 2peak .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wicks et al. (2025) conducted a systematic review in Healthy individuals and patients with cardiovascular disease (n=353,208). Heart Rate Index (HRI) equation vs. Measured peak VO2 (indirect calorimetry) was evaluated on Peak VO2 (METs) (p=0.833). The Heart Rate Index equation accurately estimated measured peak VO2 with only a 1% difference (7.08 vs 7.15 METs), whereas standard exercise-based equations significantly overpredicted it by 25.6%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: