Key result
Conventional exercise prescriptions in LV dysfunction push ~69% of training heart rates above anaerobic threshold.
Why the study?
Do conventional exercise prescription methods increase the likelihood of exceeding the anaerobic threshold and decreasing ventricular function compared to the anaerobic threshold method in patients with left ventricular dysfunction?
Population
24 males, comprising 12 subjects with documented left ventricular dysfunction and 12 age-matched control…
Comparison
Conventional exercise prescription methods vs Anaerobic threshold exercise prescription method
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May warrant caution with conventional prescriptions in LV dysfunction; leaves open whether anaerobic threshold guidance improves outcomes in trials.
Cross-Sectional (n=24)
Do conventional exercise prescription methods increase the likelihood of exceeding the anaerobic threshold and decreasing ventricular function compared to the anaerobic threshold method in patients with left ventricular dysfunction?
p-value: p=<0.001
Conventional exercise prescription methods for patients with left ventricular dysfunction frequently result in target heart rates that exceed the anaerobic threshold, potentially compromising optimal ventricular function.
Normandin et al. (1993) conducted a cross-sectional in Left ventricular dysfunction (n=24). Conventional exercise prescription methods vs. Anaerobic threshold (AT) method was evaluated on Training heart rate ranges above anaerobic threshold (p=<0.001). Conventional exercise prescription methods in patients with left ventricular dysfunction resulted in 69.4% of training heart rate ranges exceeding the anaerobic threshold (P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: