Abstract:Oxygen uptake (VO 2 ) kinetics provide information about the ability to respond to the increased physical load during a constant work rate test (CWRT). Box-Jenkins transfer function (BJ-TF) models can extract kinetic features from the phase II VO 2 response during a CWRT, without being affected by unwanted noise contributions (e.g., phase I contribution or measurement noise). CWRT data of 18 COPD patients were used to compare model fits and kinetic feature values between BJ-TF models and three typically applie… Show more
“…Breath-by-breath data during CWRT were pre-processed and resampled to a 1 Hz time series as explained by Buekers and colleagues (6). A Box-Jenkins transfer function with a first order system model and a second order noise model was fitted to the V O 2 time series from 30 s before the increase in WR until 180 s after this step increase in WR to calculate V O 2 MRT (= time delay + time constant; Figure 1) (6).…”
Section: Kinetic Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An additional slow component, superimposed on the primary component of the response (Figure 1), can delay or prevent reaching this steady state (35,37). Kinetic features such as mean response time (MRT) and gain describe the primary component of the V O 2 response (6). V O 2 mean response time (MRT) indicates the rate of the V O 2 increase above unloaded cycling.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These slow V O 2 responses in patients with COPD have been attributed to slow muscle O 2 utilization (22,23,32) and/or ventilatory and cardiovascular restrictions that reduce oxygen delivery to the working muscles (5,9,10,12,15,19). When a V O 2 response is severely slowed, the V O 2 increase is rather linear in nature, making MRT calculations unreliable (6). Low response amplitudes during CWRT can additionally lead to unreliable kinetic feature values for patients with COPD (8).…”
Kinetic features such as oxygen uptake (V̇o2) mean response time (MRT), and gains of V̇o2, carbon dioxide output (V̇co2), and minute ventilation (V̇e) can describe physiological exercise responses during a constant work rate test of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to establish simple guidelines that can identify COPD patients for whom kinetic analyses are (un)likely to be reliable and examined whether slow V̇o2 responses and gains of V̇o2, V̇co2, and V̇e are associated with ventilatory, cardiovascular, and/or physical impairments. Kinetic features were examined for 265 COPD patients [forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1): 54 ± 19%predicted] who performed a constant work rate test (duration > 180 s) with breath-by-breath measurements of V̇o2, V̇co2, and V̇e. Negative/positive predictive values were used to define cutoff values of relevant clinical variables below/above which kinetic analyses are (un)likely to be reliable. Kinetic feature values were unreliable for 21% (= 56/265) of the patients and for 79% (= 19/24) of the patients with a peak work rate (WRpeak)< 45 W. Kinetic feature values were considered reliable for 94% (= 133/142) of the patients with an FEV1 > 1.3 L. For patients exhibiting reliable kinetic feature values, V̇o2 MRT was associated with ventilatory (e.g., FEV1 %predicted: P < 0.001; r = −0.35) and physical (e.g., V̇o2peak %predicted: P = 0.009; r = −0.18) impairments. Gains were mainly associated with cardiac function and ventilatory constraints, representing both response efficiency and limitation. Kinetic analyses are likely to be unreliable for patients with a WRpeak < 45 W. Whereas gains enrich analyses of physiological exercise responses, V̇o2 MRT shows potential to serve as a motivation-independent, physiological indicator of physical performance. NEW & NOTEWORTHY A constant work rate test that is standardly performed during a prerehabilitation assessment is unable to provide reliable kinetic feature values for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with a peak work rate below 45 W. For patients suffering from less severe impairments, kinetic analyses are a powerful tool to examine physiological exercise responses. Especially oxygen uptake mean response time can serve as a motivation-independent, physiological indicator of physical performance in patients with COPD.
“…Breath-by-breath data during CWRT were pre-processed and resampled to a 1 Hz time series as explained by Buekers and colleagues (6). A Box-Jenkins transfer function with a first order system model and a second order noise model was fitted to the V O 2 time series from 30 s before the increase in WR until 180 s after this step increase in WR to calculate V O 2 MRT (= time delay + time constant; Figure 1) (6).…”
Section: Kinetic Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An additional slow component, superimposed on the primary component of the response (Figure 1), can delay or prevent reaching this steady state (35,37). Kinetic features such as mean response time (MRT) and gain describe the primary component of the V O 2 response (6). V O 2 mean response time (MRT) indicates the rate of the V O 2 increase above unloaded cycling.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These slow V O 2 responses in patients with COPD have been attributed to slow muscle O 2 utilization (22,23,32) and/or ventilatory and cardiovascular restrictions that reduce oxygen delivery to the working muscles (5,9,10,12,15,19). When a V O 2 response is severely slowed, the V O 2 increase is rather linear in nature, making MRT calculations unreliable (6). Low response amplitudes during CWRT can additionally lead to unreliable kinetic feature values for patients with COPD (8).…”
Kinetic features such as oxygen uptake (V̇o2) mean response time (MRT), and gains of V̇o2, carbon dioxide output (V̇co2), and minute ventilation (V̇e) can describe physiological exercise responses during a constant work rate test of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to establish simple guidelines that can identify COPD patients for whom kinetic analyses are (un)likely to be reliable and examined whether slow V̇o2 responses and gains of V̇o2, V̇co2, and V̇e are associated with ventilatory, cardiovascular, and/or physical impairments. Kinetic features were examined for 265 COPD patients [forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1): 54 ± 19%predicted] who performed a constant work rate test (duration > 180 s) with breath-by-breath measurements of V̇o2, V̇co2, and V̇e. Negative/positive predictive values were used to define cutoff values of relevant clinical variables below/above which kinetic analyses are (un)likely to be reliable. Kinetic feature values were unreliable for 21% (= 56/265) of the patients and for 79% (= 19/24) of the patients with a peak work rate (WRpeak)< 45 W. Kinetic feature values were considered reliable for 94% (= 133/142) of the patients with an FEV1 > 1.3 L. For patients exhibiting reliable kinetic feature values, V̇o2 MRT was associated with ventilatory (e.g., FEV1 %predicted: P < 0.001; r = −0.35) and physical (e.g., V̇o2peak %predicted: P = 0.009; r = −0.18) impairments. Gains were mainly associated with cardiac function and ventilatory constraints, representing both response efficiency and limitation. Kinetic analyses are likely to be unreliable for patients with a WRpeak < 45 W. Whereas gains enrich analyses of physiological exercise responses, V̇o2 MRT shows potential to serve as a motivation-independent, physiological indicator of physical performance. NEW & NOTEWORTHY A constant work rate test that is standardly performed during a prerehabilitation assessment is unable to provide reliable kinetic feature values for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with a peak work rate below 45 W. For patients suffering from less severe impairments, kinetic analyses are a powerful tool to examine physiological exercise responses. Especially oxygen uptake mean response time can serve as a motivation-independent, physiological indicator of physical performance in patients with COPD.
“…Contributions can focus on sensors, wearable hardware, algorithms, or integrated monitoring systems. We organized the different papers according to their contributions to the main parts of the monitoring and control engineering scheme applied to human health applications, namely papers focusing on measuring/sensing of physiological variables [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31], contributions describing research on the modelling of biological signals [32][33][34][35][36][37][38], papers highlighting health monitoring applications [39][40][41][42], and finally examples of control applications for human health [43][44][45][46][47][48]. In comparison to biomedical engineering, we envision that the field of human health engineering also covers applications on healthy humans (e.g., sports, sleep, and stress) and thus not only contributes to develop technology for curing patients or supporting chronically ill people, but also for disease prevention and optimizing human well-being more generally.…”
Section: Main Content Of the Special Issuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Buekers et al [36] applied a dynamic Box-Jenkins transfer function modelling approach for quantifying the VO 2 kinetics in patients with COPD performing a constant working rate test (CWRT). The added value of this work is that it contributes in optimizing clinical tests for objectively quantifying the physical capacity of patients.…”
Section: Main Content Of the Special Issuementioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.