Use of exercise testing in the evaluation of interventional efficacy: an official ERS statement

Use of exercise testing in the evaluation of interventional efficacy: an official ERS statement

Author Puente-Maestu, Luis Google Scholar
Palange, Paolo Google Scholar
Casaburi, Richard Google Scholar
Laveneziana, Pierantonio Google Scholar
Maltais, Francois Google Scholar
Neder, J. Alberto Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Denis E. Google Scholar
Onorati, Paolo Google Scholar
Porszasz, Janos Google Scholar
Rabinovich, Roberto Google Scholar
Rossiter, Harry B. Google Scholar
Singh, Sally Google Scholar
Troosters, Thierry Google Scholar
Ward, Susan Google Scholar
Abstract This document reviews 1) the measurement properties of commonly used exercise tests in patients with chronic respiratory diseases and 2) published studies on their utilty and/or evaluation obtained from MEDLINE and Cochrane Library searches between 1990 and March 2015. Exercise tests are reliable and consistently responsive to rehabilitative and pharmacological interventions. Thresholds for clinically important changes in performance are available for several tests. In pulmonary arterial hypertension, the 6-min walk test (6MWT), peak oxygen uptake and ventilation/carbon dioxide output indices appear to be the variables most responsive to vasodilators. While bronchodilators do not always show clinically relevant effects in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high-intensity constant work-rate (endurance) tests (CWRET) are considerably more responsive than incremental exercise tests and 6MWTs. High-intensity CWRETs need to be standardised to reduce interindividual variability. Additional physiological information and responsiveness can be obtained from isotime measurements, particularly of inspiratory capacity and dyspnoea. Less evidence is available for the endurance shuttle walk test. Although the incremental shuttle walk test and 6MWT are reliable and less expensive than cardiopulmonary exercise testing, two repetitions are needed at baseline. All exercise tests are safe when recommended precautions are followed, with evidence suggesting that no test is safer than others.
xmlui.dri2xhtml.METS-1.0.item-coverage Sheffield
Language English
Date 2016
Published in European Respiratory Journal. Sheffield, v. 47, n. 2, p. 429-460, 2016.
ISSN 0903-1936 (Sherpa/Romeo, impact factor)
Publisher European Respiratory Soc Journals Ltd
Extent 429-460
Origin http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00745-2015
Access rights Open access Open Access
Type Article
Web of Science ID WOS:000385286600016
URI https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/57988

Show full item record




File

File Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Search


Browse

Statistics

My Account