Objective: To systematically review and critically appraise the literature on measurement properties of cardiopulmonary exercise test protocols for measuring aerobic capacity, VO2max, in persons after stroke. Data sources: PubMed, Embase and Cinahl were searched from inception up to 15 June 2016. A total of 9 studies were identified reporting on 9 different cardiopulmonary exercise test protocols. Study selection: VO2max measured with cardiopulmonary exercise test and open spirometry was the construct of interest. The target population was adult persons after stroke. We included all studies that evaluated reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, content validity, hypothesis testing and/ or responsiveness of cardiopulmonary exercise test protocols. Data extraction: Two researchers independently screened the literature, assessed methodological quality using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and extracted data on measurement properties of cardiopulmonary exercise test protocols. Data synthesis: Most studies reported on only one measurement property. Best-evidence synthesis was derived taking into account the methodological quality of the studies, the results and the consistency of the results. Conclusion: No judgement could be made on which protocol is “best” for measuring VO2max in persons after stroke due to lack of high-quality studies on the measurement properties of the cardiopulmonary exercise test.
This systematic review aims to get insight into the feasibility of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in patients with cancer prior to a physical exercise programme. We will focus on quality (defined as the adherence to international guidelines for methods of CPET) and safety of CPET. Furthermore, we compare the peak oxygen uptake (V̇O2peak) values of patients with cancer with reference values for healthy persons to put these values into a clinical perspective. A computer aided search with ‘cardiopulmonary exercise testing’ and ‘cancer’ using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pedro, CINAHL® and SPORTDiscus™ was carried out. We included studies in which CPET with continuous gas exchange analysis has been performed prior to a physical exercise programme in adults with cancer. Twenty studies describing 1158 patients were eligible. Reported adherence to international recommendations for CPET varied per item. In most studies, the methods of CPET were not reported in detail. Adverse events occurred in 1% of patients. The percentage V̇O2peak of reference values for healthy persons varied between 65% and 89% for tests before treatment, between 74% and 96% for tests during treatment and between 52% and 117% for tests after treatment. Our results suggest that CPET is feasible and seems to be safe for patients with cancer prior to a physical exercise programme. We recommend that standard reporting and quality guidelines should be followed for CPET methods. The decreased V̇O2peak values of patients with cancer indicate that physical exercise should be implemented in their standard care.
Introduction: Reference values for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters provide the comparative basis for answering important questions concerning the normalcy of exercise responses in patients, and significantly impacts the clinical decision-making process. Areas covered: The aim of this study was to provide an updated systematic review of the literature on reference values for CPET parameters in healthy subjects across the life span. A systematic search in MEDLINE, Embase, and PEDro databases were performed for articles describing reference values for CPET published between March 2014 and February 2019. Expert opinion: Compared to the review published in 2014, more data have been published in the last five years compared to the 35 years before. However, there is still a lot of progress to be made. Quality can be further improved by performing a power analysis, a good quality assurance of equipment and methodologies, and by validating the developed reference equation in an independent (sub)sample. Methodological quality of future studies can be further improved by measuring and reporting the level of physical activity, by reporting values for different racial groups within a cohort as well as by the exclusion of smokers in the sample studied. Normal reference ranges should be well defined in consensus statements.
