Journals / Anadolu Kardiyoloji Dergisi / 2011 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2

A comparison of pulmonary function, peripheral and respiratory muscle strength and functional capacity in the heart failure patients with different functional classes

Farklı fonksiyonel sınıflardaki kalp yetersizliği hastalarında, solunum fonksiyonları, periferik ve solunum kas kuvveti ve fonksiyonel kapasitenin karşılaştırılması

Pages
101–106
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The 6MWT distance (328.35±101.56 m; vs. 480.05±104.19 m) quadriceps femoris (218.83±63.62 N; vs. 290.69±115.53 N) and biceps brachii (164.22±44.78 N; vs. 219.19±49.37 N) muscle strength of Class III patients were significantly lower than of Class II patients (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This cross-sectional, observational study was planned to compare pulmonary function, respiratory and peripheral muscle strength, and functional capacity in different functional classes of heart failure patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Thirty-four heart failure patients, in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II and III (68.59±9.84 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) =34.24±7.59%) were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The 6MWT distance (328.35±101.56 m; vs. 480.05±104.19 m) quadriceps femoris (218.83±63.62 N; vs. 290.69±115.53 N) and biceps brachii (164.22±44.78 N; vs. 219.19±49.37 N) muscle strength of Class III patients were significantly lower than of Class II patients (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: This cross-sectional, observational study was planned to compare pulmonary function, respiratory and peripheral muscle strength, and functional capacity in different functional classes of heart failure patients. Methods: Thirty-four heart failure patients, in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II and III (68.59±9.84 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) =34.24±7.59%) were included. Class II and III patients’ pulmonary function was assessed using spirometry, respiratory muscle strength using a mouth pressure device, functional capacity using six minute walk test (6MWT), quadriceps femoris and biceps brachii muscle strength were evaluated using a hand-held dynamometer, and variables were compared. Student t, Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Spearman correlation coefficients were used for statistical analysis. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength between the two groups (p>0.05). The 6MWT distance (328.35±101.56 m; vs. 480.05±104.19 m) quadriceps femoris (218.83±63.62 N; vs. 290.69±115.53 N) and biceps brachii (164.22±44.78 N; vs. 219.19±49.37 N) muscle strength of Class III patients were significantly lower than of Class II patients (p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, farklı fonksiyonel sınıftaki kalp yetersizliği hastalarının solunum fonksiyonları, solunum ve periferik kas kuvveti ve fonksiyonel kapasitelerinin karşılaştırılması amacıyla enine-kesitsel, gözlemsel olarak planlandı. Yöntemler: Çalışmaya New York Kalp Derneği sınıflamasına (NYHA) göre Sınıf II ve III’te olan 34 kalp yetersizliği olgusu (68.59±9.84 yıl, sol ventrikül ejeksiyon fraksiyonu (SVEF)=%34.24±7.59) dahil edildi. Sınıf II ve III’teki olguların solunum fonksiyonları; spirometre, solunum kas kuvveti ağız basınç ölçüm cihazı; quadriceps femoris ve biceps brachii kas kuvveti el dinamometresi; fonksiyonel kapasite ise- altı dakika yürüme testi (6DYT) ile değerlendirilip ve değişkenler karşılaştırıldı. İstatistiksel analiz için Student t, Ki-kare, Mann-Whitney U testleri, ve Spearman korelasyon katsayısı kullanıldı. Bulgular: Grupların solunum fonksiyon testi ve solunum kas kuvveti değerleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark yoktu (p>0.05). Sınıf III’teki olguların 6DYT mesafesi (328.35±101.56 m; karşın 480.05±104.19 m), quadriceps femoris (218.83±63.62 N; karşın 290.69±115.53 N) ve biceps brachii (164.22±44.78 N; karşın 219.19±49.37 N) kas kuvveti, Sınıf II’deki olguların değerlerinden anlamlı olarak daha düşüktü (tümü için p

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜÇLÜ, M. B., ARIKAN, H., İNCE, D. İ., TÜLÜMEN, E., TOKGÖZOĞLU, L., SAVCI, S. (2022). A comparison of pulmonary function, peripheral and respiratory muscle strength and functional capacity in the heart failure patients with different functional classes. Anadolu Kardiyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2, 101–106. https://ajindex.com/articles/436542

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Dickstein K, Cohen-Solal A, Filippatos G, McMurray JJ, Ponikowski P, Poole-Wilson PA, et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008: the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association of the ESC (HFA) and endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). Eur J Heart Fail 2008; 10: 933-89
  2. Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W, Howard VJ, Rumsfeld J, Manolio T, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2006 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2006; 113: e85-151
  3. Cahalin LP. Heart failure. Phys Ther 1996; 76: 516-33
  4. Kitzman DW, Little WC, Brubaker PH, Anderson RT, Hundley WG, Marburger CT, et al. Pathophysiological characterization of isolated diastolic heart failure in comparison to systolic heart failure. JAMA 2002; 288: 2144-50
  5. Jones RC, Francis GS, Lauer MS. Predictors of mortality in patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 1025-9
  6. Dimopoulou I, Tsintzas OK, Daganou M, Cokkinos DV, Tzelepis GE. Contribution of lung function to exercise capacity in patients with heart failure. Respiration 1999; 66: 144-9
  7. Gosker HR, Wouters EF, van der Vusse GJ, Schols AM. Skeletal muscle dysfunction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic heart failure: underlying mechanisms and therapy perspectives. Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 71: 1033-47
  8. Carmo MM, Bárbara C, Ferreira T, Branco J, Ferreira S, Rendas AB. Diaphragmatic function in patients with chronic left ventricular failure. Pathophysiology 2001; 8: 55-60
  9. Magnusson G, Isberg B, Karlberg KE, Sylvén C. Skeletal muscle strength and endurance in chronic congestive heart failure secondary to idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 1994; 73: 307-9
  10. Leidy NK, Rentz AM, Zyczynski TM. Evaluating Health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with congestive heart failure. A review of recent randomized controlled trials. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 19-46
  11. Remme WJ, Swedberg K. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure. Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure, European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 1527-60
  12. Lung function testing: selec