4.6 Article

Reference values for cardiopulmonary exercise testing in healthy volunteers: the SHIP study

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 33, 期 2, 页码 389-397

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00074208

关键词

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing; oxygen uptake; reference values; Study of Health in Pomerania; ventilatory efficiency

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [01ZZ0403, 01ZZ0103, 01GI0883]
  2. Ministry for Education, Research and Cultural Affairs
  3. Ministry of Social Affairs of the Federal State of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is a widely applied clinical procedure. The aim of the present study was to acquire a comprehensive set of reference values for cardiopulmonary responses to exercise and to evaluate possible associations with sex, age and body mass index (BMI). A standardised progressive incremental exercise protocol on a cycle ergometer was applied to 1,708 volunteers of a cross-sectional epidemiologic survey, called Study of Health in Pomerania. Individuals with cardiopulmonary disorders, or echocardiographic or lung function pathologies, were excluded. The influence of potential confounding factors, such as smoking, taking beta-blockers, hypertension, diastolic dysfunction, BMI and physical activity, were analysed for their influencing power. Reference values of CPET parameters were determined by regression analyses. Of the volunteers, 542 current smokers and obese individuals were excluded for not being representative of a healthy population. The final sample size was 534 (253 males), with age 2580 yrs. The current study provides a representative set of reference values for CPET parameters based on age and weight. Sex and age have a significant influence on exercise parameters. While addressing the problem of a selection bias, the current study provides the first comprehensive set of reference values obtained in a large number of healthy volunteers within a population-based survey.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据