Key result
The heart rate deflection point showed no significant difference compared to gas exchange threshold (p=0.07) and had a moderate intraclass correlation (0.74; 95% CI 0.52-0.87) in subjects with COPD.
Why the study?
Exercise training prescription in COPD is challenging, and the applicability of the heart rate deflection point as a low-cost, noninvasive alternative to assess the anaerobic threshold is unknown.
Does the heart rate deflection point accurately reflect the gas exchange threshold for exercise prescription in subjects with COPD?
Cross-Sectional (n=31)
Does the heart rate deflection point accurately reflect the gas exchange threshold for exercise prescription in subjects with COPD?
Effect estimate: ICC 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.87)
p-value: p=0.07
The heart rate deflection point has limited applicability for prescribing and monitoring exercise training in subjects with COPD due to high limits of agreement with the gas exchange threshold.
Should not yet alter exercise testing in COPD; hypothesis-generating for HRDP as GET surrogate.
Background: Prescription of exercise training in subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a challenge in clinical practice. The heart rate deflection point (HRDP) is an option to reduce costs, reflects the anaerobic threshold and it is noninvasive; however its applicability in COPD is still unknown. Aim: To compare HRDP with gas exchange threshold values (GET) in subjects with COPD. Methods: Thirty-one subjects were evaluated in this cross-sectional study, diagnosed with COPD. The subjects performed an incremental exercise test on a treadmill to determine the GET, peak oxygen consumption (VO2PEAK), speed corresponding to VO2PEAK (sVO2PEAK), and peak values of heart rate (HRPEAK). To determine HRDP the heart rate values observed were plotted as a function of intensity. Results: The HRDP was visible in 96.77% of subjects. There was no difference between HRDP and GET (p = 0.07) and a moderate intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC): 0.74 [0.52–0.87] and high limits of agreements were presented (±1.1 km·h−1). Conclusion: The HRDP cannot be used to determine the limits between the physiological domains of these subjects. Thus, although significant correlation was found between HRDP and GET, their application for training prescription and monitoring in subjects with COPD proved to be limited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leite et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n=31). Heart rate deflection point (HRDP) vs. Gas exchange threshold values (GET) was evaluated on Difference between HRDP and GET (ICC 0.74, 95% CI 0.52-0.87, p=0.07). The heart rate deflection point showed no significant difference compared to gas exchange threshold (p=0.07) and had a moderate intraclass correlation (0.74; 95% CI 0.52-0.87) in subjects with COPD.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: