Interval and continual training in cardiovascular rehabilitation

Česká verzia

Authors: L. Mífková ¹; J. Siegelová ¹; L. Vymazalová ¹; H. Svačinová ¹; P. Vank ¹; R. Panovský ²; J. Meluzín ²; J. Vítovec ²
Authors place of work: Klinika funkční diagnostiky a rehabilitace Lékařské fakulty MU a FN u sv. Anny, Brno, přednostka prof. MUDr. Jarmila Siegelová, DrSc. ¹; I. interní kardio-angiologická klinika Lékařské fakulty MU a FN u sv. Anny, Brno, přednosta prof. MUDr. Jiří Vítovec, CSc., FESC ²
Published in the journal: Vnitř Lék 2006; 52(1): 44-50
Category: Original Contributions

Summary

The objective of the study was to evaluate the physiological effectiveness and the influence of two modifications of aerobic training (interval and continual) on the physical performance in the patients with ischemic heart disease. 38 males with ischemic heart disease (age 60 ± 10,2 years) passed three months training programme of 60 min 3 times a week (10 min of warm up phase, 25 min of aerobic phase, 15 min of muscle development, 10 min of relaxing phase). Patients with coronarographically verified stenosis > 50 % luminal diameter and/or left ventricular ejection fraction lower than 40 % (n = 22) had in terms of aerobic phase interval training prescribed (30second work phases with stress intensity on the level of anaerobic threshold alternating with 60second rest phases with intensity of 5 W); other patients (n = 16) passed aerobic phase of the programme with continual stress of intensity on the level of ventilation anaerobic threshold. After the determination of three month rehabilitation programme the maximal achieved performance as well as aerobic capacity evaluated by spiroergonomic examination statistically significantly increased in the group of patients with interval stress and also in the group with continual stress. Despite the group with interval training performed 2, 5 – 3 times less work in each training unit (p < 0,01), the performance and aerobic capacity parameters after the termination of three month programme did not statistically significantly differ from the group with continual training. The advantage of the continual training is a possibility to achieve an improvement also at the patients with left ventricular dysfunction and chronic ischemic heart disease who could have worse tolerance of the continual stress.

Key words:
interval training - continuous training - coronary heart disease - cardiac rehabilitation

Zdroje

1. Chaloupka V, Vaněk P, Juráň F et al. Nemocniční, posthospitalizační a lázeňská rehabilitace u nemocných s ICHS. Cor Vasa 1998; 40: K243-K251.

2. Chaloupka V, Elbl L, Nehyba S. Silový trénink u nemocných po infarktu myokardu. Vnitř Lék 2000; 46: 829-834.

3. Jančík J, Svačinová H, Dobšák P et al. Kombinovaný trénink u nemocných se systolickou dysfunkcí levé komory srdeční. Vnitř Lék 2003; 49: 280-284.

4. Jančík J, Siegelová J, Svačinová H et al. Combined Aerobic Training with Resistent Exercise in Chronic Heart Failure. European Journal Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation 2004; 11(Supl): 65-65.

5. Meluzín J, Jančík J, Panovský R et al. Vliv tělesného tréninku na velikost ischemické dysfunkce levé komory u nemocných s chronickou ischemickou chorobou srdeční. Vnitř Lék 2001; 47: 87-91.

6. Jančík J, Siegelová J, Dobšák P et al. Baroreflex sensitivity and heart rate variability in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease and systolic dysfunction: effect of exercise training. Clinical Autonomic Research 2003; 13: 57-57.

7. Mookerjee S. The Application of Interval Training for Exercise Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation. J Cardiopulmonary Rehabil 1998; 18: 233-235.

8. Åstrand PO, Rodahl K. Textbook of Work Physiology. 2 ed. USA, Mc Graw-Hill 1977.

9. Brooks GA, Fahey TD. Fundamentals of human performance. 2. ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company 1987.

10. Máček M, Vávra J. Fyziologie a patofyziologie tělesné zátěže. 2. ed. Praha: Avicenum 1988.

11. Kubánková V, Hendl J. Statistika pro zdravotníky. Praha: Avicenum 1986.

12. Gerylovová A, Holčík J. Úvod do statistiky. Text pro semináře. Brno: Vydavatelství MU 2001.

13. Greenhalgh T. Jak pracovat s vědeckou publikací. Základy medicíny založené na důkazu. Praha: Grada Publishing 2003.

14. Zvárová J. Základy statistiky pro biomedicínské obory. Praha: Karolinum 2002.

15. Nechwatal RM, Duck C, Gruber G. Physical training as interval or continuous training in chronic heart failure for improving functional capacity, hemodynamics and quality of life - a controlled study. Z Kardiol 2002; 91: 328-337.

16. Meyer K, Peters K, Roskamm H. Improvement of aerobic capacity in chronic congestive heart failure. Which training method is appropriate? Z Kardiol 1998; 87: 8-14.

17. Meyer K, Samek L, Schwaibold M et al. Interval training in patients with severe chronic heart failure: analysis and recommendations for exercise procedures. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1997; 29: 306-312.

18. Rognmo A, Hetland E, Helgerud J et al. High intensity aerobic interval exercise is superior to moderate intensity exercise for increasing aerobic capacity in patients with coronary artery disease. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation 2004; 11: 216-222.

19. Meyer K, Samek L, Schwaibold M et al. Physical responses to different modes of interval exercise in patients with chronic heart failure - application to exercise training. Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 1040-1047.

20. Meyer K, Foster C, Georgakopoulos N et al. Comparison of left ventricular function during interval versus steady-state exercise training in patients with chronic congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1998; 82: 1382-1387.

21. Meyer K, Lehmann M, Sunder G et al. Interval versus continuous exercise training after coronary bypass surgery: a comparison of training-induced acute reactions with respect to the effectiveness of the exercise methods. Clin Cardiol 1990; 13: 851-861.

22. Placheta Z, Siegelová J, Štejfa M et al. Zátěžová diagnostika v ambulantní a klinické praxi. Praha: Grada Publishing 1999.