N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
Official Journal of the , , , ,
In association with
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063
Online ISSN 1973-9095
Marzolini S. 1, Swardfager W. 2, Alter D. A. 1, 3, Oh P. I. 1, Tan Y. 1, Goodman J. M. 1, 4
1Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada;
2 Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada;
3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada;
4 Faculty of Physical Education and Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
BACKGROUND: The optimal approach to prescribing resistance training (RT) combined with aerobic training (AT) for psychosocial and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is unclear.
AIM: To compare the effects of AT combined with RT (1 versus 3 sets) versus AT alone on HRQOL and psychosocial outcomes.
DESIGN: Subjects (N.=72) were randomized to AT (5 d∙wk-1) or AT (3 d∙wk-1) with either 1 set (AT/RT1) or 3 sets (AT/RT3) of RT performed 2 d∙wk-1.
SETTING: Outpatient Cardiac Rehabilitation Program.
POPULATION: Subjects with coronary artery disease.
METHODS: HRQOL and psychosocial parameters were assessed before and after 29 weeks of training by questionnaire.
RESULTS: Fifty-three subjects (mean±SD age 60.6±10.6 years) completed training. There was a group effect for change in self-efficacy of lower body physical activity tasks (P=0.03) with significantly greater improvement for AT/RT3 than AT alone (17.5±16.6% vs. 3.2±12.8% respectively, p=0.04). Lower body self-efficacy improved for AT/RT1 (15.5±13.8%, p<0.001) but not for AT alone (P=0.2). Self-efficacy for upper body tasks improved with AT/RT3 (18.2±19.9%, P=0.003) and AT/RT1 training (12.6±15.8%, P=0.005) but not with AT alone (8.3±16.1%, P=0.1). AT/RT3 and AT/RT1 training yielded improvements in depression score (-4.0±7.7, P=0.04 and -3.0±5.1, P=0.02 respectively) but not with AT alone (-0.5±4.7, P=0.71). The improvement from baseline in physical HRQOL score (MOS, SF-36) averaged 8.2±11.2% for AT (P=0.04), 10.4±11.9% for AT/RT1 (P=0.006) and 12.0±12.9% for AT/RT3 (P=0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Both AT+RT groups with either 1 or 3 sets (AT 3 d∙wk-1and RT 2 d∙wk-1) each yield more pronounced psychosocial and HRQOL adaptations than AT alone (5 d∙wk-1). RT prescription beyond 1 set may further augment selected parameters in cardiac patients.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: These results provide further rationale to develop combined AT+RT regimens for individuals with coronary artery disease.