Related Experiment Videos
Comparison of graded versus constant treadmill test protocols for quantifying intermittent claudication
H Chaudhry1, A Holland, J Dormandy
1Clinical Research Centre, St George's Hospital, London, UK.
Vascular Medicine (London, England)
|January 1, 1997
Summary
The graded treadmill test shows slightly better reproducibility for measuring intermittent claudication symptoms than the constant load test. Absolute claudication distance (ACD) is more reproducible than initial claudication distance (ICD) with both methods.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Medicine
- Exercise Physiology
Background:
- Treadmill walking distance is standard for quantifying intermittent claudication (IC) symptoms.
- Graded exercise tests may offer better reproducibility and reduce placebo effects compared to constant load tests.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the reproducibility of absolute claudication distance (ACD) and initial claudication distance (ICD) between constant load and graded load treadmill protocols.
Main Methods:
- Fourteen patients with stable IC underwent two trials each of constant load and graded load treadmill tests in a random sequence.
- Reproducibility was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (R) and relative coefficients of repeatability.
Main Results:
- The graded load protocol showed higher reproducibility for ICD (R=0.84) and ACD (R=0.98) compared to the constant load protocol (ICD R=0.68, ACD R=0.93).
- ACD demonstrated significantly higher reproducibility than ICD across both protocols.
- Relative coefficients of repeatability were marginally better for the graded test for ACD (1.52 vs 1.90) but worse for ICD (1.69 vs 1.47).
Conclusions:
- Graded load treadmill tests offer slightly improved reproducibility over constant load tests for IC symptom quantification.
- Absolute claudication distance (ACD) is a more reproducible measure than initial claudication distance (ICD) regardless of the treadmill protocol used.