Multicomponent versus aerobic exercise intervention: Effects on hemodynamic, physical fitness and quality of life in adult and elderly cardiovascular disease patients: A randomized controlled study

Luca Poli,Gianpiero Greco,Stefania Cataldi,Marco Matteo Ciccone,Annamaria De Giosa,Francesco Fischetti
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36200
IF: 3.776
2024-08-13
Heliyon
Abstract:Objective: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain a leading cause of mortality globally, emphasizing the need for effective preventive measures. This study aimed to investigate the effects of a multicomponent compared to an aerobic training program on the hemodynamic parameters, physical fitness, psychophysical health status and quality of life (QoL) of adults and elderly with stabilized CVDs. Methods: Thirty-three subjects (19M and 14F; age 69.5 ± 4.9 years; BMI 27.34 ± 4.95 kg/m2) suffering from CVDs voluntarily participated in this 10-week randomized controlled study and were allocated into three groups: multicomponent training group (MTG; 6M, 6F; cardiorespiratory, resistance, flexibility and breathing exercises; 60', 2d·wk-1), aerobic training group (ATG; 7M, 5F; aerobic-only training; 60', 2d·wk-1) or a wait-list control group (CG; 6M, 3F; no PA). Hemodynamic parameters were assessed through resting hearth rate (RHR) and peripheral-systolic and diastolic blood pressure (P-SBP/P-DBP). Physical fitness was assessed via a 30" chair stand test (30CST), timed up and go (TUG) test, handgrip strength (HGS) test, and 2' step test (TMST). The health status, QoL and enjoyment were evaluated with short form-12 (SF-12), world health organization quality of life-bref (WHOQoL-bref) and physical activity enjoyment scale (PACES), respectively. Results: After the intervention, MTG showed significant improvements in hemodynamic parameters (95 % CI, RHR: 2.76 to 9.07; P-SBP: 3.28 to 13.71; P-DBP: 3.56 to 8.94; p < 0.001), physical fitness (95 % CI, 30CST: 4.42 to -1.90; TUG: 0.56 to 1.58; TMST: 35.24 to -18.58; Dominant HGS: 4.00 to -1.65; Undominant HGS: 2.87 to -0.79, p < 0.001) and enjoyment (PACES: 15.18 to -5.48, p < 0.001) compared to CG; ATG showed significant improvement in hemodynamic parameters (95 % CI, RHR: 1.76 to 8.07; P-SBP: 3.19 to 13.63; P-DBP: 4.47 to 9.85, p < 0.001), physical fitness (95 % CI, 30CST: 2.59 to -0.07; TUG: 0.03 to 1.05; Dominant HGS: 2.42 to -0.07, p < 0.05; TMST: 36.08 to -19.41, p < 0.001) and enjoyment (PACES: 14.68 to -4.98, p < 0.001) compared to CG. No significant changes were observed in QoL and SF-12 (p > 0.05). Significant differences between MTG and ATG were only found in physical fitness variables (95 % CI, 30CST: 3.21 to -0.45, p < 0.01; Dominant HGS: 0.00 to 3.00, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Findings showed significant improvements in hemodynamic parameters and physical fitness suggesting the effectiveness of the multicomponent exercise program, similar to aerobic-only training, and greater efficacy for lower limb strength and dominant hand grip strength in adults and elderly with stabilized CVDs. Both exercise groups showed similar levels of enjoyment.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?