Mixed circuit training acutely reduces arterial stiffness in patients with chronic stroke: a crossover randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Investigate whether a single bout of mixed circuit training (MCT) can elicit changes in arterial stiffness in patients with chronic stroke. Secondly, to assess the between-day reproducibility of post-MCT arterial stiffness measurements. Methods: Seven participants (58 ± 12 yr) performed a non-exercise control session (CTL) and two bouts of MCT on separate days in a randomized counterbalanced order. The MCT involved 3 sets of 15-repetition maximum for 10 exercises, with each set separated by 45-s of walking.Brachial-radial pulse wave velocity (br-PWV), radial artery compliance (AC) and reflection index (RI1,2) were assessed 10 min before and 60 min after CTL and MCT. Ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) was calculated from 24-h recovery ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Results: Compared to CTL, after 60 min of recovery from the 1 st and 2 nd bouts of MCT, lower values were observed for br-PWV (mean diff = -3.9 and -3.7 m/s, respectively, P < 0.01; ICC2,1 = 0.75) and RI1,2 (mean diff = -16.1 and -16.0 %, respectively, P < 0.05; ICC2,1 = 0.83) concomitant with higher AC (mean diff = 1.2 and 1.0 × 10 -6 cm 5 /dyna, respectively, P < 0.01; ICC2,1 = 0.40). The 24-h AASI was reduced after bouts of MCT vs. CTL (1 st and 2 nd bouts of MCT vs. CTL: mean diff = -0.32 and -0.29 units, respectively, P < 0.001; ICC2,1 = 0.64). Conclusions:A single bout of MCT reduces arterial stiffness during laboratory (60 min) and ambulatory (24 h) recovery phases in patients with chronic stroke with moderate-to-high reproducibility.Trial registration: Ensaiosclinicos.gov.br identifier RBR-5dn5zd.

Confirming the attainment of maximal oxygen uptake within special and clinical groups: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiopulmonary exercise test and verification phase protocols

“…Table 5 shows the percentages of participants that achieved a lower, equal, or higher value in the verification phase versus the CPET for each study where this information was available. Fig 6 shows participant-level differences between the highest values obtained in the CPET and verification phase for the seven studies where these data were available [ 31 , 44 – 47 , 56 , 60 ].…”

“…Four out of seven people after stroke achieved a that was > 3% higher in the verification phase versus the CPET (range 4.7% to 24.1%) [ 60 ]. Similar to the para ice hockey athletes [ 44 ], it is unclear whether the same limiting factors during the CPET also occurred during the verification phase, leading to submaximal values in both protocols.…”