comparison of two strength training modes in copd, barcelona
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Background:
•! Strength training is an important component in a
rehabilitation program.
•! Muscle of ambulation is the most important target
muscle group.
•! The challenge is how to maintain the effects
achieved during a rehabilitation program?
![Page 3: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The aim of the study was to compare:
Leg press (LP) Step device (SD)
![Page 4: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Study design
n = 20
Leg press n = 10
Step device n = 10
Randomized
![Page 5: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Inclusion criterias:
•! Patients coming to participate in a 4-weeks in-patients rehabilitation
program
•! Diagnosis of COPD (FEV1 /FVC < 0.70, FEV1 < 80 % pred.)
•! Ex. smokers
![Page 6: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Intervention
•! Maximal strength training
•! Intensity: 5 RM x 4 sets
•! Progression: LP: loads SD: height
•! 5 sessions a week – 4 weeks
•! Supervised
Both groups participated in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program
![Page 7: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
39 cm.
9 cm.
![Page 8: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Outcome measures:
1.!Maximal muscle strength,
One repetition maximum (1RM)
2. Work economy
VO2 at daily walking speed on a treadmill
3. FEV1
![Page 9: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Baseline characteristics
Leg Press (LP) Step Device (SD)
n = 10 n = 10
Age (yr) 65 (8.7) 69 (6.2)
M/F 7/3 6/4
BMI (kg !m 2) 25 (4.7) 26 (3.5)
FEV1/ FVC (%) 48 (11) 50 (15)
1RM (kg) 143 (56) 127 (45)
![Page 10: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Results
Leg Press Step Device
•! 1RM (%) 20 (13) ** 10 (10) *
•! Work economy (%) 12 (14) * 11 (16) *
•! FEV1 9 (11) 2 (17)
(pre-post: * p<0.05, ** p< 0.005)
-10
0
10
20
30
40
1RM Work economy
Ch
an
ge (
%)
Leg Press Step Device
![Page 11: Comparison of two strength training modes in COPD, Barcelona](https://reader031.vdocuments.mx/reader031/viewer/2022012102/616a00d511a7b741a34dbf9f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Conclusions
•! Both LP and SD gave significant improvements in
muscle strength (1RM) and work economy.
•! Equipment like a step device seems to be an useful
tool for physiotherapist and patients to improve and/
or maintain strength in muscles of ambulation.