Key result
The cardiovascular response to exercise guided by rating of perceived exertion was equivalent between supervised center-based and self-care home-based settings.
Why the study?
Does a self-care home-based setting result in an equivalent cardiovascular response compared to a supervised center-based setting when rating of perceived exertion is used to guide aerobic exercise intensity in cardiac rehabilitation patients?
Observational (n=97)
Open-label
Yes
Does a self-care home-based setting result in an equivalent cardiovascular response compared to a supervised center-based setting when rating of perceived exertion is used to guide aerobic exercise intensity in cardiac rehabilitation patients?
Rating of perceived exertion appears equally effective in guiding exercise intensity for cardiac rehabilitation patients in both supervised center-based and unsupervised home-based settings.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support home-based RPE-guided exercise; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate if exercise intensity guided by rating of perceived exertion (RPE) results in an equivalent cardiovascular response when applied in either a center-based or a home-based setting. DESIGN: Data from patients with heart disease (post-valve surgery and atrial fibrillation post-radiofrequency ablation) participating in exercise-based rehabilitation were included. Patients performed a 12-week program in either a center- or a home-based setting. Using RPE, patients recorded their exercise intensity 3 times during an aerobic training phase. Exercise intensity was objectively measured using heart rate (HR) monitors. RESULTS: A total of 2622 RPE values with corresponding HR data were available. There was no difference in the level of association (interaction P = 0.51) between HR and RPE seen in the center-based setting (mean of 6.1 beats/min per 1.0 difference in RPE; 95% confidence interval, 4.8-7.5 beats/min) compared with the home-based setting (mean of 5.3 beats/min per 1.0 difference in RPE; 95% confidence interval, 4.0-6.5 beats/min). The level of patient familiarization, exercise intensity, and patient characteristics did not affect the level of association between RPE and HR. CONCLUSIONS: Independent of exercise setting, RPE appears to be equally effective in guiding exercise intensity of patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Heart disease (post-valve surgery and atrial fibrillation post-radiofrequency ablation) (n=97). Supervised center-based setting vs. Self-care home-based setting was evaluated on Cardiovascular response (change in heart rate in beats/min per 1.0-unit change in Rating of Perceived Exertion) (p=0.51). The cardiovascular response to exercise guided by rating of perceived exertion was equivalent between supervised center-based and self-care home-based settings.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: