ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vallet, G
Right arrow Articles by Prefaut, C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vallet, G
Right arrow Articles by Prefaut, C
Eur Respir J 1997; 10: 114-122
Copyright © ERS Journals Ltd 1997


Clinical Trial

Comparison of two training programmes in chronic airway limitation patients: standardized versus individualized protocols

G Vallet, S Ahmaidi, I Serres, C Fabre, D Bourgouin, J Desplan, A Varray, and C Prefaut

This study tested the effect of two methods of training, one individualized at the heart rate corresponding to the gas exchange threshold (GET) and the other at the heart rate corresponding to 50% of maximal heart rate reserve, on maximal and submaximal cardiorespiratory response in 24 patients with chronic airway limitation (CAL). The patients were randomly assigned to either the individualized training group (IT; n = 12) or the standardized training group (ST; n = 12). The training programme consisted of 4 weeks of stationary bicycle exercise, 5 days.week-1. Before reconditioning began, the target level based on heart rate was not significantly different between groups (109 +/- 4 versus 110 +/- 3 beats.min-1, in IT and ST, respectively). Post-training, a significant increase in symptom-limited oxygen uptake (V'O2.sl) and maximal O2 pulse was found in IT, whereas ST exhibited no significant change. In each group, GET was statistically increased in much the same way as V'O2,sl, with a higher increase in IT (p < 0.01) than ST (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, IT exhibited a concomitant and gradual decrease in minute ventilation (V'E), carbon dioxide production (V'CO2), and venous lactate concentration ([La]), whereas ST presented no significant change in these parameters (intergroup p < 0.01). Breathing pattern was also altered after IT, at the same metabolic level and at the same ventilation level (intergroup p < 0.05). Cardiac responses were modified in the two groups. At the same metabolic level, a significantly lower cardiac frequency was found both for IT and ST (intragroup p < 0.05 after training). In contrast, the increase in O2 pulse was only significantly higher in It after training. These data show the greater efficiency of an individualized training protocol based on determination of gas exchange threshold as compared to a standardized protocol, in improving exercise performance, when applied to a patient group. Despite an apparently similar target training level, the individualized method clearly optimized the physiological training effects in patients with chronic airway limitation and, more particularly, decreased their ventilatory requirement.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
E. G. Collins, W. E. Langbein, L. Fehr, S. O'Connell, C. Jelinek, E. Hagarty, L. Edwards, D. Reda, M. J. Tobin, and F. Laghi
Can Ventilation-Feedback Training Augment Exercise Tolerance in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease?
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., April 15, 2008; 177(8): 844 - 852.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
A. L. Ries, G. S. Bauldoff, B. W. Carlin, R. Casaburi, C. F. Emery, D. A. Mahler, B. Make, C. L. Rochester, R. ZuWallack, and C. Herrerias
Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Joint ACCP/AACVPR Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines
Chest, May 1, 2007; 131(5_suppl): 4S - 42S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
L. Nici, C. Donner, E. Wouters, R. Zuwallack, N. Ambrosino, J. Bourbeau, M. Carone, B. Celli, M. Engelen, B. Fahy, et al.
American thoracic society/european respiratory society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., June 15, 2006; 173(12): 1390 - 1413.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc Am Thorac SocHome page
N. S. Hill
Pulmonary rehabilitation.
Proceedings of the ATS, January 1, 2006; 3(1): 66 - 74.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Respir JHome page
A. Couillard and C. Prefaut
From muscle disuse to myopathy in COPD: potential contribution of oxidative stress
Eur. Respir. J., October 1, 2005; 26(4): 703 - 719.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
T. Troosters, R. Casaburi, R. Gosselink, and M. Decramer
Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 1, 2005; 172(1): 19 - 38.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ThoraxHome page
M A Puhan, H J Schunemann, M Frey, M Scharplatz, and L M Bachmann
How should COPD patients exercise during respiratory rehabilitation? Comparison of exercise modalities and intensities to treat skeletal muscle dysfunction
Thorax, May 1, 2005; 60(5): 367 - 375.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Respir JHome page
N. Ambrosino and S. Strambi
New strategies to improve exercise tolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Eur. Respir. J., August 1, 2004; 24(2): 313 - 322.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Behav ModifHome page
C. Gilbert
Clinical Applications of Breathing Regulation: Beyond Anxiety Management
Behav Modif, October 1, 2003; 27(5): 692 - 709.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
ThoraxHome page
M D L Morgan and J R Britton
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease * 8: Non-pharmacological management of COPD
Thorax, May 1, 2003; 58(5): 453 - 457.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
K P S. Nair
Life goals: the concept and its relevance to rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2003; 17(2): 192 - 202.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
F. Ortega, J. Toral, P. Cejudo, R. Villagomez, H. Sanchez, J. Castillo, and T. Montemayor
Comparison of Effects of Strength and Endurance Training in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 1, 2002; 166(5): 669 - 674.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
E. A. Normandin, C. McCusker, M. Connors, F. Vale, D. Gerardi, and R. L. ZuWallack
An Evaluation of Two Approaches to Exercise Conditioning in Pulmonary Rehabilitation*
Chest, April 1, 2002; 121(4): 1085 - 1091.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ThoraxHome page
British Thoracic Society Standards of Care Subcomm
Pulmonary rehabilitation
Thorax, November 1, 2001; 56(11): 827 - 834.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
R. Casaburi
Skeletal Muscle Function in COPD
Chest, May 1, 2000; 117(5_suppl_1): 267S - 271S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
I. Vogiatzis, A. F. Williamson, J. Miles, and I. K. Taylor
Physiological Response to Moderate Exercise Workloads in a Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program in Patients With Varying Degrees of Airflow Obstruction
Chest, November 1, 1999; 116(5): 1200 - 1207.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
Pulmonary Rehabilitation---1999
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 1, 1999; 159(5): 1666 - 1682.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
Skeletal Muscle Dysfunction in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease . A Statement of the American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., April 1, 1999; 159(4): S2 - 40.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the European Respiratory Society.