ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2016
Assessment of various parameters using simple non-invasive tests in patients with cardiovascular diseases with or without cardiac rehabilitation.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Difference in Prognosis between Continuation and Discontinuation of A 5-Month Cardiac Rehabilitation Program in Outpatients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Screening Validity of Arterial Pressure-Volume Index and Arterial Velocity-Pulse Index for Preclinical Atherosclerosis in Japanese Community-Dwelling Adults: the Nagasaki Islands Study.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2018Article
- Cardiac rehabilitation in patients with cardiovascular disease leads various hemodynamic parameters obtained using simple non-invasive tests to their appropriate levels.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves cardiac function and exercise capacity in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Simpler techniques are needed for use by physicians in the examination room to assess the usefulness of CR. We enrolled 46 consecutive CVD patients in a CR program (CR group) and prospectively followed them for 3 months. We compared them to 18 age-, gender- and body mass index-matched CVD patients without CR (non-CR group). Various parameters were measured at baseline and after 3 months using 3 simple non-invasive tests: severity of atherosclerosis [arterial velocity pulse index and arterial pressure volume index (API)] were determined using PASESA®, an autonomic nerve total activity amount index and a coefficient of variation of the R-R interval (CVRR) were determined using eHEART®, and peripheral resistance index, pressure rate product, stroke volume and cardiac index were determined using nico®]. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics including percentages (%) of ischemic heart disease and heart failure between the non-CR and CR groups. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic BP, heart rate and API at baseline significantly decreased and CVRR at baseline significantly increased after 3 months in the CR group, but not in the non-CR group. In addition, ΔAPI (Δ = the value after 3 months minus the value at baseline) was positively associated with ΔSBP in the CR group. In conclusion, CR significantly decreased BP and improved atherosclerosis and sympathetic nerve activity. These findings suggest that simple non-invasive tests may be useful for assessing the effects of CR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.