To verify the usefulness of current recommended level of target exercise heart rate (HR) and of different HR-based methods for calculating target HR in patients with and without beta-blocker treatment.
Methods
We studied 53 patients not treated with beta-blocker and 159 patients on beta-blocker treatment. All patients underwent a maximal exercise test with gas analysis, and first ventilatory threshold (VT1 or aerobic threshold), second ventilatory threshold (VT2 or anaerobic threshold), time of exercise, maximum load, metabolic parameters, HR at rest (HRrest), HRpeak, HR at VT1 (HRVT1) and at VT2 (HRVT2), and 75, 80, and 85% of HRmax (HR75%, HR80%, HR85%) were calculated. Exercise HR was also determined using the Karvonen formula, applying 60, 70, and 80% of the heart rate reserve (HRR) (HRKarv0.6, HRKarv0.7, and HRKarv0.8).
Results
This study included 102 patients on a beta-blocker and 39 not treated with negative cronotropic effect drugs. Maximum load, metabolic parameters, HRrest, HRpeak, HRVT1, and HRVT2 were significantly lower in patients on beta-blocker treatment. The proportion of patients with a HR75%, HR80%, HR85%, HRKarv0.6, HRKarv0.7, and HRKarv0.8 <VT1 and >VT2 was very high and depended on whether patients were on beta-blocker treatment.
Conclusions
Prescribed exercise intensity should be within VT1 and VT2, so that the efficacy and safety is guaranteed. If determining VT1 and VT2 is not possible, HR-based methods can be used, but with caution. In fact, there will be always a proportion of patients training below VT1 or above VT2. On the other hand, recommendations for patients on a beta-blocker should be different from patients not receiving a beta-blocker. Patients not treated with a beta-blocker should exercise at HRKarv0.7 or at HR85%. In patients on a beta-blocker, we recommend preferentially a target HR of HRKarv0.6 or HR80%.
Jolliffe JA, Rees K, Taylor RS, et al. Exercise-based rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; (1): CD001800.
2.
PedersenBKSaltinB. Evidence for prescribing exercise as therapy in chronic disease. Scand J Med Sci Sports2006; 16: 3–63.
3.
BlairSNKohlHWBarlowCE. Changes in physical fitness and all-cause mortality: a prospective study of healthy and unhealthy men. JAMA1995; 273: 1093–1098.
4.
SakamotoSYokoyamaNTamoriY. Patients with peripheral artery disease who complete 12-week supervised exercise training program show reduced cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. Circulation2009; 73: 167–173.
5.
SandvikLErikssenJThaulowE. Physical fitness as a predictor of mortality among healthy, middle-aged Norwegian men. N Eng J Med1993; 328: 533–537.
6.
SmartNMarwickTH. Exercise training for patients with heart failure: a systematic review of factors that improve mortality and morbidity. Am J Med2004; 116: 693–706.
7.
WeiMGibbonsLWKampertJB. Low cardiorespiratory fitness and physical inactivity as predictors of mortality in men with type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med2000; 132: 605–611.
8.
RankinAJRankinACMAcyntireC. Walk or run? Is high-intensity exercise more effective than moderate intensity exercise at reducing cardiovascular risk. Scott Med J2012; 57: 99–102.
9.
WilsoffUEllingseOKemiOJ. High-intensity interval training to maximize cardiac benefits of exercise training?Exerc Sport Sci Rev2009; 37: 139–146.
10.
DuncanGEAntonSDSydemanSJ. Prescribing exercise at varied levels of intensity and frequency: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med2005; 165: 2362–2369.
11.
HelgerudJKarlsenTKimWY. Interval and strength training in LVEF patients. Int J Sports Med2011; 32: 54–59.
12.
WisløffUStøylenALoennechenJP. Superior cardiovascular effect of aerobic interval training versus moderate continuous training in heart failure patients: a randomized study. Circulation.2007; 115: 3086–3094.
13.
RognmoØHetlandEHelgerudJ. High intensity aerobic interval exercise is superior to moderate intensity exercise for increasing aerobic capacity in patients with coronary artery disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2004; 11: 216–222.
14.
JensenBEFletcherBJRuppJC. Training level comparison study: effect of high and low intensity exercise on ventilator threshold in men with coronary artery disease. J Cardiopulm Rehabil1996; 16: 227–232.
15.
Swain DP and Franklin BA. Comparison of cardioprotective benefits of vigorous versus moderate intensity aerobic exercise. American Journal of Cardiology 2006; 97(1): 141–147.
16.
Nordsborg NB, Lundby C, Leick L, et al. Relative workload determines exercise-induced increases in PGC-1α mRNA. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 2010; 42(8): 1477–1484.
17.
LeeMPaffenbargerRS. Associations of light, moderate, and vigorous intensity physical activity with longevity: the Harvard Alumni Health Study. Am J Epidemiol2000; 151: 1477–1484.
18.
López Chicharro J, Calvo Martinez F, Hernandez Vaquero A. Exercise physiology. Concept and assessment of the anaerobic thresold. In: López Chicharro J and Fernandez Vaquero A (eds) Fisiologia Del Ejercicio, 2nd ed. Medica Panamericana, 2001, pp 257–270.
19.
NeilanTGJanuzziJLLee-LewandrowskiE. Myocardial injury and ventricular dysfunction related to training levels among non elite participants in the Boston Marathon. Circulation2006; 114: 2325–2333.
20.
CarvalhoVOMezzaniA. Aerobic exercise training intensity in patients with chronic heart failure: principles of assessment and prescription. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2011; 18: 5–14.
21.
ACSM’s resource manual for guidelines for exercise testing and prescription, 6th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009.
22.
ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription, 7th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2013.
23.
HaskellWLLeeIMPateRR. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation2007; 116: 1081–1093.
24.
NelsonMERejeskiWBlairSN. Physical activity and public health in older adults: recommendation from the American College of SportsMedicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation2007; 116: 1094–1105.
25.
FletcherGFBaladyGJAmsterdamEA. Exercise standards for testing and training: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation2001; 104: 1694–1740.
26.
PescatelloLSFranklinBAFagardR. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Exercise and hypertension. Med Sci Sports Exerc2004; 36: 533–553.
27.
GordonNFGulanickMCostaF. Physical Activity and Exercise Recommendations for Stroke Survivors: an American Heart Association Scientific Statement from the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation and Prevention; the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism and the Stroke Council. Circulation2004; 109: 2031–2041.
28.
HofmannPTschakertG. Special needs to prescribe exercise intensity for scientific studies. Cardiol Res Pract2010; 2011: 209302–209302.
29.
BindeRKWornischMCorraU. Methodological approach to the first and second lactate threshold in incremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2008; 15: 726–734.
30.
HofmannPTschakertGStarkM. Estimation error when using the %HRR method compared to the lactate turn point. Med Sci Sports Exerc2009; 41(Suppl. 5): 221–222.
31.
TabetJYMeurinPBen DrissA. Determination of exercise training heart rate in patients on beta-blockers after myocardial infarction. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2006; 13: 538–543.
32.
HofmannPVon DuvillardSPSeibertFJ. %HR target heart rate is dependent on heart rate performance curvedeflection. Med Sci Sports Exerc2001; 33: 1726–1731.
33.
WornischMHofmanPFruhwalFM. Influence of beta-blocker use on percentage of target heart rate exercise prescription. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2003; 10: 296–301.
34.
Villelabeitia K, Díaz-Buschmann I, Vaquerizo-García E, et al. Bruce protocol: common errors in the evaluation of functional capacity and exercise prescription in patients with heart disease. Rehabilitación 2013; 47: 162–169.
35.
WassermanKMcIlroyMB. Detecting the threshold of anaerobic metabolism in cardiac patients during exercise. Am J Cardiol1964; 14: 417–436.
36.
DíazIVillelabeitiaKCaleroMJ. How to determine exercise intensity in patients treated with beta-blocker. Rev Esp Cardiol2011; 64: 417–436.
37.
OmiyaKItohHOsadaN. Impaired heart rate response during incremental exercise in patients with acute myocardial infarction and after coronary artery bypass grafting: valuation of coefficients with Karvonen’s formula. Jpn Circ J2000; 64: 851–855.
38.
NieuwlandWBerkhuysenMAVan VeldhuizenDJ. Individual assessment of intensity-level for exercise training in patients with coronary artery disease is necessary. Int J Cardiol2002; 84: 15–20.
39.
ChaloupkaVElblLNehybaS. Exercise intensity prescription after myocardial infarction in patients treated with beta-blockers. J Cardiopulm Rehabil2005; 25: 361–365.
40.
ZanettiniRCenteleghePRattiF. Training prescription in patients on beta-blockers: percentage peak exercise methods or self-regulation?Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil2011; 19: 205–212.
41.
HofmannPPokanRVon DuvillardSP. Heart rate performance curve during incremental cycle ergometer exercise in healthy young male subjects. Med Sci Sports Exerc1997; 29: 762–768.
42.
HofmannPWonischMPokan. β1-adrenoceptor mediated origin of the heart rate performance curve deflection. Med Sci Sports Exerc2005; 37: 1704–1709.
