Real intensity of physical activity capacity of patients with chronic disease: a cross-sectional study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the real intensity level of exercise in a sample of patients with chronic disease from obesity, rheumatology, hematology and other departments involved in a hospital-based program of adapted physical activity (APA). For this cross-sectional study, we studied seventy-five patients with chronic disease and no beta-blocker treatment. They systematically performed a cardiopulmonary exercise test before participating in a supervised APA practice using a telemetry wireless system to monitor heart rate (HR) during the first session. Based upon the results of the functional evaluation of exercise performance, we studied two groups of patients: (1) No limitation in exercise performance (maximal oxygen uptake greater than or equal to 80% of the theoretical reference) and (2) limited exercise performance (maximal oxygen uptake less than 80% of the theoretical value). Fifty-two patients (69.3%) were women, mean age was 42.6 (± 13.8), and mean BMI was 36.7 (± 10.6). Most patients had been referred for obesity (57.3%). We found 39 patients with normal exercise capacities and 36 patients with limited exercise performance. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups. For all populations, the mean and median real intensity levels of exercise in a sample of patients were moderate (55-70% HR max) and were the same for both groups. During the most intensive 15-min bout of the APA session, the HR for patients in both groups was greater than 70% of the actual maximum HR. This study observed a moderate level of APA exercise intensity in patients suffering from various chronic diseases. We found no significant difference in intensity level of exercise between patients' capacities, i.e., with and without limitation of their maximal performance.

Physical Activity Capacity Assessment of Patients with Chronic Disease and the Six-Minute Walk Test: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) to determine the physical activity capacities of patients with chronic disease. Methods: For this cross-sectional study, we investigated 156 patients with chronic disease and no beta-blocker treatment. They systematically performed a maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test to determine their heart rate peak (HRPeak) and maximal oxygen uptake (V'O2max). We considered two groups of patients based upon the results of the functional evaluation of exercise performance: (1) No limitation in exercise performance (V'O2max greater or equal to 80% of the theoretical reference) and (2) limited exercise performance (V'O2max less than 80% of the theoretical value). All patients also received a 6MWT on the same day as the exercise test. Results: We found 68 (43.6%) patients with normal exercise capacities and 88 (56.4%) patients with limited exercise performance. In this sample, 6MWT mean distances were 510 (87) and 506 (86) m, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups for distance and end-test heart rate. The correlation between matrix V'O2max measured during the maximal incremental exercise test and the 6MWT distance displayed a positive slope (r = 0.549 CI95 [0.431−0.656]­p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our results showed a moderate relationship between 6MWT and physical activity capacity for patients with chronic disease.

Physical Activity Capacity Assessment of Patients With Chronic Disease and the 1-Minute Sit to Stand Test: Is There an Interest?

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the 1-minute Sit to Stand test (1MSTS) to determine physical activity capacities for patients with chronic disease. Methods: For this cross-sectional study, we studied fifty patients with chronic disease and no beta-blocker treatment. They systematically performed a cardiopulmonary exercise test to determine maximal oxygen uptake (V'O2max). We considered two groups of patients based on the results of the functional evaluation of exercise performance: (1) No limitation in exercise performance (V'O2max greater or equal to 80% of the theoretical reference) and (2) limited exercise performance (V'O2max <80% of the theoretical value). All patients also received an 1MSTS on the same day. Results: We found 22 (44.0%) patients with normal exercise capacity and 28 (56.0%) patients with limited exercise performance. In this sample, mean 1MSTS repetitions were 27.1 (7.1) and 25.2 (8.7), respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups for repetition and Borg Scale end test. The correlation between V'O2max measured during the exercise test and 1MSTS repetitions displayed a positive slope [r = 0.401 (95% CI 0.114-625)]. Conclusion: This study demonstrated a moderate relationship between 1MSTS and V'O2max for patients with chronic disease. 1MSTS did not permit the precise determination of physical activity capacities in this sample.