Muscular and functional effects of partitioning exercising muscle mass in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Low-load, high-repetitive single-limb resistance training may increase limb muscle function and functional exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) while minimizing the occurrence of limiting exertional symptoms. Whether high-repetitive single-limb resistance training would perform better than high-repetitive two-limb resistance training is unknown. In addition, the mechanisms underlying possible benefits of high-repetitive resistance training has not been investigated. The aims of this study are to compare single versus two-limb high-repetitive resistance training in patients with COPD and to investigate mechanisms of action of these training modalities. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is a prospective, assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial. The participants are patients with stable severe to very severe COPD who are older than 40 years of age and healthy controls. The intervention is single-limb, high-repetitive, resistance training with elastic bands, three times/week for 8 weeks. The control is two-limb high-repetitive resistance training with elastic bands, three times/week for 8 weeks. The primary outcomes is change in the 6-min walking distance after 8 weeks of single-limb or two-limb high-repetitive resistance training. The secondary outcomes are changes in limb muscle strength and endurance capacity, key protein involved in quadriceps anabolic/catabolic signalization, fiber-type distribution and capillarization, subjective dyspnea and muscle fatigue, muscle oxygenation, cardiorespiratory demand and health-related quality-of-life after 8 weeks of single-limb or two-limb high-repetitive resistance training. The acute effects of single-limb versus two-limb high-repetitive resistance training on contractile fatigue, exercise stimulus (the product of number of repetition and load), subjective dyspnea and muscle fatigue, muscle oxygenation, and cardiorespiratory demand during upper and lower limb exercises will also be investigated in patients with COPD and healthy controls. Randomization will be performed using a random number generator by a person independent of the recruitment process, using 1:1 allocation to the intervention and the control group using random block sizes. BLINDING: All outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. DISCUSSION: The results of this project will provide important information to help developing and implementing customized exercise training programs for patients with COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02283580 Registration date: 4 November 2014. First participant randomized: 10 November 2014.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».