Key result
Resistance training safely improves cardiac patient strength and capacity with less ischemia than dynamic exercise.
Why the study?
Research over the past decade has evaluated the safety and effectiveness of resistance training in cardiac patients suitable for conventional exercise rehabilitation.
Does resistance training improve physical capacity and safety in cardiac patients suitable for conventional exercise rehabilitation?
Does resistance training improve physical capacity and safety in cardiac patients suitable for conventional exercise rehabilitation?
Resistance training is a safe and effective component of cardiac rehabilitation that improves strength and exercise capacity without excessive ischemic risk.
May support adding resistance training to cardiac rehab; extends evidence base but leaves open need for prospective RCTs.
During the past decade, research has demonstrated that resistance training is a safe and effective mode of exercise for cardiac patients who are suitable candidates for conventional exercise rehabilitation. Fears of an excessive pressor response seem unwarranted and the incidence of ischaemia is less than that during dynamic exercise such as walking and cycling. Major benefits from resistance training include improved muscular strength, increased peak exercise capacity and submaximal endurance, reduced ratings of perceived exertion during exercise and improved self-efficacy in strength-related tasks. The effects of resistance training on blood pressure and blood lipids levels are equivocal, but there may be positive effects on glucose metabolism. This form of training is likely to assume greater importance in cardiac rehabilitation in the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McCartney et al. (1996) conducted a review in Cardiac disease. Resistance training vs. Dynamic exercise was evaluated. Resistance training is a safe and effective exercise for cardiac patients, improving muscular strength and exercise capacity with less ischemia than dynamic exercise.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: