Why the study?
Does cycle ergometer exercise induce a stronger systolic blood pressure response compared to treadmill exercise in healthy young men?
Does cycle ergometer exercise induce a stronger systolic blood pressure response compared to treadmill exercise in healthy young men?
Cycle ergometry induces a stronger systolic blood pressure response than treadmill exercise at equivalent workloads, suggesting it may impose a greater cardiovascular burden during exercise testing or prescription.
Cycle ergometry may elicit higher exercise SBP than treadmill in young men; leaves open effects on testing protocols or risk assessment.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to exam the effects of exercise modes on the systolic blood pressure and rate-pressure product during a gradually increasing exercise load from low to high intensity. METHODS: Fifteen apparently healthy men aged 19 to 23 performed the graded exercise tests on cycle ergometer (CE) and treadmill (TM). During the low-to-maximal exercises, oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and rate-pressure product were measured. RESULTS: CE had a significantly lower maximum VO2 than TM (CE vs. TM: 48.51±1.30 vs. 55.4±1.19 mL/kg/min; p<0.001). However, CE showed a higher maximum SBP (SBPmax) at the all-out exercise load than TM (CE vs. TM: 170±2.4 vs. 154±1.7 mmHg; p<0.001). During the low-to-maximal intensity increment, the slope of the HR with VO2 was the same as VO2 increased in times of the graded exercise test of CE and TM (CE vs. TM: 2.542±0.100 vs. 2.506±0.087; p=0.26). The slope of increase on SBP accompanied by VO2 increase was significantly higher in CE than in TM (CE vs. TM: 1.669±0.117 vs. 1.179±0.063; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The SBP response is stronger in CE than in TM during the graded exercise test. Therefore, there is a possibility that CE could induce a greater burden on workloads to cardiovascular system in humans than TM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: