ArticleGlobal cardiology science & practice2025
Feasibility of in-bed exercise testing using a clamp-on pedaling device: A single-center pragmatic study.
Article in Global cardiology science & practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExercise stress testing is the gold standard for evaluating peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and exercise-induced pulmonary hypertension, but traditional treadmill testing has operational limitations including need for patient transport, specialized facilities, and inability to perform invasive hemodynamic monitoring during exercise.
methodsThis prospective single-center feasibility study enrolled 54 consecutive patients undergoing ABI (
resultsExercise was attempted in 94.4% (51/54; 95% CI: 87.0-100%) of patients with a 94.1% (48/51; 95% CI: 86.3-100%) completion rate among those who attempted. Data interpretability was excellent: 97.1% (34/35; 95% CI: 91.4-100%) for ABI and 84.2% (16/19; 95% CI: 68.4-100%) for RHC. All prespecified feasibility criteria were met. System usability ratings were 85.7% (95% CI: 74.3-97.1%) for ABI and 89.5% (95% CI: 73.7-100%) for RHC. Adverse events were minor and occurred in 14.3% of ABI and 5.3% of RHC procedures. Among RHC patients with paired measurements, median cardiac output increased from 4.0 [IQR: 3.8-4.7] L/min at rest to 5.0 [4.8-6.5] L/min with exercise, with a median mPAP/CO slope of 8.26 [6.88-14.12] mmHg/L/min.
conclusionThis feasibility study demonstrates that bedside exercise testing using a portable pedaling device is technically feasible, safe, and well-tolerated for both ABI and RHC procedures. These preliminary results support larger studies to evaluate diagnostic validity and clinical utility.
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.