Identificador persistente para citar o vincular este elemento: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/42027
Campo DC Valoridioma
dc.contributor.authorGimenez, M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSaavedra-Santana, Pedroen_US
dc.contributor.authorLantarón, Eva M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTran, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMartín, N.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBach, J. R.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-28T14:35:29Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-28T14:35:29Z-
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.issn2577-4409en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/42027-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Compare two stair climbing protocols with each other and with an established cycle-ergometry protocol for smokers. Methods: In an exercise physiology laboratory, 25 smokers’ maximal O2 consumption (VO2max) was determined by cycleergometry at 30W/3 min increments. Then, randomly they performed either maximal fixed intensity (FiSC) or bi-level intensity (BiSC) stair-climbing protocols at the same pace to exhaustion, before crossing-over to perform the other 1 to 3 days later. The sequence was repeated 6 weeks later. The FiSC was performed on a 10 flight staircase. The BiSC was performed by repeatedly climbing and descending a single flight. Outcome measures were exertional dyspnea (ED), leg pain (LP), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), peripheral pulse oximetry (SpO2), blood pressure, physiologic cost index (PCI), and self-reported preferences. Results: All 25 subjects climbed the single-flight BiSC 10 times but no one could climb more than 8 consecutive flights (FiSC). Eighty to 95% of heart rate at VO2max was achieved by both, but the BiSC was significantly better tolerated over ten flights with significantly lower HR (<.001), PCI (<.001), ED and LP (p <0.05), and higher RR (<.001) and SpO2 (<.004). In addition, using only one flight was more practical, for both de subjects himself and for surveillance by the medical staff to control the speed of climbing, and the subjective and cardio respiratory responses. Conclusion: The protocol of Bi-level exercise repeatedly climbing one flight of stairs is more practical, effective, and better tolerated than that of continuous stairs climbing.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Respiratory Disease, Care and Medicine (IJRDM)en_US
dc.sourceInternational Journal of Respiratory Disease, Care and Medicine (IJRDM) [ISSN 2577-4409], v. 2 (1), p. 8-13en_US
dc.subject32 Ciencias médicasen_US
dc.subject1209 Estadísticaen_US
dc.subject.otherMaximal stair climbing testen_US
dc.subject.otherPulmonary rehabilitationen_US
dc.subject.otherAerobic exerciseen_US
dc.subject.otherCycle ergometryen_US
dc.subject.otherEnduranceen_US
dc.titleComparison of two stair climbing protocols for smokersen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dc.typeArticlees
dc.identifier.doi10.19070/2577-4409-170003en_US
dc.description.lastpage13-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.description.firstpage8-
dc.relation.volume2-
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.identifier.ulpgces
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextCon texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptGIR Estadística-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Matemáticas-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Ciencias Médicas y Quirúrgicas-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-1681-7165-
crisitem.author.parentorgDepartamento de Matemáticas-
crisitem.author.fullNameSaavedra Santana, Pedro-
crisitem.author.fullNameMartín Álamo, María Nieves-
Colección:Artículos
miniatura
pdf
Adobe PDF (335,98 kB)
Vista resumida

Google ScholarTM

Verifica

Altmetric


Comparte



Exporta metadatos



Los elementos en ULPGC accedaCRIS están protegidos por derechos de autor con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.