IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i4p2764-d1057602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Verification Phase a Suitable Criterion for the Determination of Maximum Oxygen Uptake in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction? A Validation Study

Author

Listed:
  • Agustín Manresa-Rocamora

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Department of Sport Sciences, Sports Research Centre, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, 03202 Elche, Spain)

  • Laura Fuertes-Kenneally

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Cardiology Department, Dr. Balmis General University Hospital, 03010 Alicante, Spain)

  • Carles Blasco-Peris

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain)

  • Noemí Sempere-Ruiz

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Department of Sport Sciences, Sports Research Centre, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, 03202 Elche, Spain)

  • José Manuel Sarabia

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Department of Sport Sciences, Sports Research Centre, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, 03202 Elche, Spain)

  • Vicente Climent-Paya

    (Institute for Health and Biomedical Research of Alicante (ISABIAL), 03010 Alicante, Spain
    Cardiology Department, Dr. Balmis General University Hospital, 03010 Alicante, Spain)

Abstract

The verification phase (VP) has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional criteria used for the determination of the maximum oxygen uptake (VO 2 max) in several populations. Nonetheless, its validity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyse whether the VP is a safe and suitable method to determine the VO 2 max in patients with HFrEF. Adult male and female patients with HFrEF performed a ramp-incremental phase (IP), followed by a submaximal constant VP (i.e., 95% of the maximal workload during the IP) on a cycle ergometer. A 5-min active recovery period (i.e., 10 W) was performed between the two exercise phases. Group (i.e., median values) and individual comparisons were performed. VO 2 max was confirmed when there was a difference of ≤ 3% in peak oxygen uptake (VO 2 peak) values between the two exercise phases. Twenty-one patients (13 males) were finally included. There were no adverse events during the VP. Group comparisons showed no differences in the absolute and relative VO 2 peak values between both exercise phases ( p = 0.557 and p = 0.400, respectively). The results did not change when only male or female patients were included. In contrast, individual comparisons showed that the VO 2 max was confirmed in 11 patients (52.4%) and not confirmed in 10 (47.6%). The submaximal VP is a safe and suitable method for the determination of the VO 2 max in patients with HFrEF. In addition, an individual approach should be used because group comparisons could mask individual differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Agustín Manresa-Rocamora & Laura Fuertes-Kenneally & Carles Blasco-Peris & Noemí Sempere-Ruiz & José Manuel Sarabia & Vicente Climent-Paya, 2023. "Is the Verification Phase a Suitable Criterion for the Determination of Maximum Oxygen Uptake in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction? A Validation Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-10, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:2764-:d:1057602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/2764/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/2764/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Kaiser, 2007. "An exact and a Monte Carlo proposal to the Fisher–Pitman permutation tests for paired replicates and for independent samples," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 402-412, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McBride, Michael & Ridinger, Garret, 2021. "Beliefs also make social-norm preferences social," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 765-784.
    2. Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Koriyama, Yukio & Sutan, Angela & Willinger, Marc, 2019. "The strategic environment effect in beauty contest games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 587-610.
    3. Koch, Alexander K. & Nafziger, Julia, 2020. "Motivational goal bracketing: An experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    4. Kajackaite, Agne, 2015. "If I close my eyes, nobody will get hurt: The effect of ignorance on performance in a real-effort experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 518-524.
    5. Stefano Bonnini & Getnet Melak Assegie & Kamila Trzcinska, 2024. "Review about the Permutation Approach in Hypothesis Testing," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-29, August.
    6. Cheung, Stephen L. & Coleman, Andrew, 2011. "League-Table Incentives and Price Bubbles in Experimental Asset Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 5704, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Christoph Huber & Jürgen Huber, 2019. "Scale matters: risk perception, return expectations, and investment propensity under different scalings," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 76-100, March.
    8. Gjedrem, William Gilje & Kvaløy, Ola, 2020. "Relative performance feedback to teams," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    9. Zaunbrecher, Henrik & Riedl, Arno, 2016. "Social Identity and Group Contests," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    10. Chmura, Thorsten & Goerg, Sebastian J. & Weiss, Pia, 2016. "Natural groups and economic characteristics as driving forces of wage discrimination," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 178-200.
    11. John M Griffin & Jordan Nickerson, 2023. "Are CLO Collateral and Tranche Ratings Disconnected?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 36(6), pages 2319-2360.
    12. Chloé Coq & Henrik Orzen & Sebastian Schwenen, 2017. "Pricing and capacity provision in electricity markets: an experimental study," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 123-158, April.
    13. Martin Beckenkamp & Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Frank P. Maier-Rigaud, 2007. "Cooperation in Symmetric and Asymmetric Prisoner's Dilemma Games," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2006_25, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    14. Cheung, Stephen L. & Hedegaard, Morten & Palan, Stefan, 2014. "To see is to believe: Common expectations in experimental asset markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 84-96.
    15. Faical Akaichi & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Lawton Lanier Nalley, 2017. "Are there trade-offs in valuation with respect to greenhouse gas emissions, origin and food miles attributes?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(1), pages 3-31.
    16. Johannes Kaiser & Michael G. Lacy, 2009. "A general-purpose method for two-group randomization tests," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 70-85, March.
    17. Brütt, Katharina & Schram, Arthur & Sonnemans, Joep, 2020. "Endogenous group formation and responsibility diffusion: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-31.
    18. K. B. S. Huth & L. J. Waldorp & J. Luigjes & A. E. Goudriaan & R. J. Holst & M. Marsman, 2022. "A Note on the Structural Change Test in Highly Parameterized Psychometric Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 1064-1080, September.
    19. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Eizo Akiyama & Ryuichiro Ishikawa, 2017. "Effects of eliciting long-run price forecasts on market dynamics in asset market experiments," Working Papers halshs-01263661, HAL.
    20. Stephen L. Cheung & Andrew Coleman, 2014. "Relative Performance Incentives and Price Bubbles in Experimental Asset Markets," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(2), pages 345-363, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:2764-:d:1057602. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.