张晓松,钟金鹏,唐贻贤,等.高强度间歇与中强度持续有氧训练对经皮冠状动脉介入术后运动康复分层低危患者的影响[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志,2022,44(1):47-51
扫码阅读全文
|
| 高强度间歇与中强度持续有氧训练对经皮冠状动脉介入术后运动康复分层低危患者的影响 |
|
| |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.2022.01.009 |
| 中文关键词: 经皮冠状动脉介入术 有氧运动 高强度间歇 中强度持续 |
| 英文关键词: Percutaneous coronary intervention Aerobic exercise Interval training Continuous training |
| 基金项目:宜昌市医疗卫生科研项目（A21-2-058） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1962 |
| 全文下载次数: 4768 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 探讨高强度间歇与中强度持续有氧训练对经皮冠状动脉介入术（PCI）后运动康复分层低危患者的影响。 方法 选取PCI术后运动康复分层低危患者43例，按照随机数字表法将其分为高强度间歇有氧训练组（高强度间歇组，22例）和中强度持续有氧训练组（中强度持续组，21例）。2组患者均采用功率自行车进行训练，高强度间歇组采用高强度间歇有氧运动训练方案（80%峰值功率，3 min高强度运动、2 min间歇，每次训练8组，共40 min，每周3次），中强度持续组采用中强度持续有氧训练方案（60%峰值功率，持续训练，每次40 min，每周3次）。训练前、训练12周后（训练后），采用超声检查、心肺运动试验（CPET）评估2组患者的心脏功能及运动耐力，并采用36条目健康调查简易量表（SF-36）中部分条目评分对2组患者进行生存质量评估。 结果 训练前，2组患者心脏功能、运动耐力及生存质量指标比较，差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。与组内训练前比较，2组患者训练后心脏功能、运动耐力及生存质量指标均改善（P＜0.05）。与中强度持续组训练后比较，高强度间歇组患者的左室射血分数［(64.95±4.13)%］、每搏输出量［(62.19±7.21)ml］、峰值功率［(87.86±3.20)w］、峰值摄氧量［(21.69±0.95)ml/kg/min］结果较为优异（P＜0.05）。 结论 与中强度持续有氧训练比较，高强度间歇有氧训练可以较好地改善PCI术后运动康复分层低危患者的心脏功能及运动耐力，但对短期生存质量无明显影响。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of high-intensity interval training and moderate continuous aerobic training on patients classified as low risk for exercise rehabilitation after a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods A total of 43 patients considered low-risk after a PCI were randomly divided into a high-intensity interval training group (HIIT group, 22 cases) and a moderate continuous aerobic training group (MCT group, 21 cases). The HIIT group received high-intensity, but aerobic interval training involving 8 rounds of 3 minutes of high-intensity exercise with 2-minute intervals at 80% of peak power over 40 minutes, 3 times a week. The MCT group trained continuously at 60% of peak power for the same duration. After 12 weeks both groups were given an ultrasound examination and a cardiopulmonary exercise test to assess their cardiac functioning and exercise endurance. The subjects′ life quality was evaluated and compared using some items from the SF-36 scale. Results Before the training, no significant differences were observed in the average left ventricular ejection fraction, stroke volume, peak power, peak oxygen uptake, anaerobic threshold, physiological functioning, physical pain, general health or social functioning between the two groups. After the training significant improvement in all these indicators was observed in both groups, but compared with MCT group, the average left ventricular ejection fraction, stroke volume, peak power and peak oxygen uptake of the HIIT group were significantly better. Conclusions High-intensity, aerobic interval training is superior to moderate but continuous aerobic training for improving the cardiac functioning and exercise endurance of patients suitable for exercise rehabilitation after a PCI. But there is no significant difference in their effect on the short-term quality of life. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
