Background This study aimed to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) responses during isometric handgrip strength tasks between primary open-angle glaucoma patients and healthy individuals. Methods Forty older adults participated: 21 glaucoma patients and 19 controls. Participants randomly performed four trials at two intensities, maximal and submaximal (at 50% of self-perceived maximal effort), with two trials per hand (one for the left eye and one for the right eye). IOP was measured immediately before exercise, during exercise, and 5 seconds post-recovery. A four-factor mixed ANOVA was used to analyze IOP responses, with task intensity and time of measurement as within-subject factors, and group (glaucoma vs. control) and sex as the between-subjects factors. Results IOP responses were comparable between glaucoma patients and healthy individuals, as the main effect of group ( p = 0.117) and its interactions did not reach statistical significance. The main effect of time reached statistical significance ( p = 0.016) due to greater IOP values during the task (17.3 ± 3.7 mmHg) compared to pre-exercise (16.3 ± 3.2 mmHg: p < 0.001), but post-exercise IOP (16.9 ± 4.1 mmHg) was not significantly different from pre-exercise ( p = 0.334) or during exercise ( p = 0.727). Greater IOP values were observed for the maximal task compared to the submaximal task ( p = 0.001), with no differences between men and women ( p = 0.699). Conclusion Submaximal isometric strength training is a safe option for glaucoma patients treated with hypotensive eye drops.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Cristina González-Hernández
Universidad de Granada
María Dolores Morenas‐Aguilar
Universidad de Granada
Beatríz Redondo
Universidad de Granada
PeerJ
Universidad de Granada
Ningbo University
Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
González-Hernández et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68af63e9ad7bf08b1eae4675 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.19845