Key result
Machine-assisted cycling increased 6-minute walk distance by 64.8 m, which was not significantly different from the 45.1 m increase seen with conventional exercise training (P=0.33).
Why the study?
Does machine-assisted cycling improve exercise capacity and endothelial function in elderly patients with heart failure compared to conventional exercise training?
RCT (n=27)
Open-label
Envelope method
No
Does machine-assisted cycling improve exercise capacity and endothelial function in elderly patients with heart failure compared to conventional exercise training?
Absolute Event Rate: 64.8% vs 45.1%
p-value: p=0.33
Machine-assisted cycling is as effective as conventional exercise training for improving exercise capacity in elderly heart failure patients, with potential added benefits for endothelial function.
Machine-assisted cycling offers a viable alternative for elderly HF patients; confirms comparable efficacy to conventional training in an RCT.
BACKGROUND: Conventional exercise training (ET) for elderly patients with heart failure (HF) includes low-intensity stretching and gait training. The effects of 2 types of low-intensity ET - machine-assisted cycling and conventional ET - on exercise capacity and endothelial function of elderly patients with HF was investigated in the present study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-seven elderly patients with HF (mean age: 79.5 years) were randomly assigned to either a machine-assisted cycling group or a conventional ET group. At baseline and after 2 weeks of ET, all patients were tested for 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and digital reactive hyperemia-peripheral arterial tonometry (RH-PAT). After 2 weeks of ET, a significant increase in 6MWD was observed in both groups with no significant difference between the groups. RH-PAT index significantly increased in patients aged ≤80 (1.55±0.33 to 1.93±0.62, P=0.035) and a trend toward increase in RH-PAT index in the machine-assisted cycling group was observed (1.59±0.52 to 1.93±0.63, P=0.053), although no change was observed in the conventional ET group. In the multivariate model, patients' age and machine-assisted cycling were associated with the increases in RH-PAT index (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Machine-assisted cycling appeared to be as effective as conventional ET on exercise capacity in elderly patients with HF. Additionally, machine-assisted cycling has the potential to improve endothelial function in these patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ozasa et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=27). Machine-assisted cycling vs. Conventional exercise training (gait training) was evaluated on Change in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) (p=0.33). Machine-assisted cycling increased 6-minute walk distance by 64.8 m, which was not significantly different from the 45.1 m increase seen with conventional exercise training (P=0.33).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: