The long-term effects of a randomized trial comparing aerobic interval versus continuous training in coronary artery disease patients: 1-year data from the SAINTEX-CAD study

Abstract

The short-term improvements of center-based AIT and ACT on physical fitness, physical activity, peripheral endothelial function, cardiovascular risk factors and QoL are sustained after a 1-year follow-up period. The majority of patients (>90%) met the recommended physical activity levels of 150 minutes/week.

A review of guidelines for cardiac rehabilitation exercise programmes: Is there an international consensus?

“…Concerns have been raised in the literature as to the efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation in the UK (where moderate-intensity aerobic endurance exercise in two to three sessions per week is recommended 39 ) for improving patient mortality, morbidity and cardiac risk factors, 53,54 Recent moderate-to vigorous-intensity interventions conducted with coronary artery disease patients in a supervised cardiac rehabilitation setting in Belgium, 55 Italy, [56][57][58][59] Germany, 60 Canada 61 and the US 62-65 resulted in significant improvements in exercise capacity (as measured by maximal exercise testing or field tests such as the 6-minute walk test and incremental shuttle walk test) in comparison to a non-exercising control group. [55][56][57]61,64,65 Improvements in cardiovascular risk factors, including lipid profile, 56,64 blood pressure 56,57,64 and body mass, 64,65 were also reported.…”

Home-Based Rehabilitation With Telemonitoring Guidance for Patients With Coronary Artery Disease (Short-Term Results of the TRiCH Study): Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

“…With the number of steps ranging between 7612 steps (HB) and 7700 steps (CB) our patients are within this target zone; whereas patients in the CG (5566) do not seems to reach this. Participants in our exercise groups (whether HB or CB) also perform a little bit better compared to the patients in the study by Pattyn et al [12], who found 6570…”

“…Steps, sedentary time (duration of sedentary activity at an intensity of ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents of task [METs]; minutes), active energy expenditure (physical activity at an intensity of ≥ 3 METs, kcal), and duration of moderate and vigorous physical activity (≥3 METs; minutes) were used in the analyses [12].…”

Amount or intensity? Potential targets of exercise interventions in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

“…Although several training interventions have shown promising results in improving exercise capacity and QoL in HFpEF,17, 18, 19 there are no data available on the health‐relevant extent of PA for this patient cohort. Previous trials comparing different training modalities in patients with HF and risk of HF did not identify a clear intensity mode for exercise 20, 21…”