You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 57, Issue 20
  • Effects of low-load and high-load resistance training combined with aerobic training in patients with coronary artery disease: a dose-dependent randomised, controlled trial (PhD Academy Award)

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PhD Academy Award
Effects of low-load and high-load resistance training combined with aerobic training in patients with coronary artery disease: a dose-dependent randomised, controlled trial (PhD Academy Award)
  1. Tim Kambič1,2
  1. 1 Department of Medical Sciences in Sport, University of Ljubljana Faculty of Sport, Ljubljana, Slovenia
  2. 2 Cardiac Rehabilitation Unit, General Hospital Murska Sobota, Murska Sobota, Slovenia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Tim Kambič, Department of Medical Sciences in Sport, University of Ljubljana Faculty of Sport, Ljubljana, Slovenia; tim.kambic{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2023-107011

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    What did I do?

    In my doctoral thesis, we studied the effects of high-load (HL) and low-load (LL) resistance training (RT) both combined with aerobic training (AT) and compared the two training modalities with AT alone as a standard care in an exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).1 In absence of safety and efficacy evidence of HL-RT in an early phase of CR, we also explored the haemodynamic response to HL-RT and LL-RT after the enrolment to outpatient CR.2

    Why did I do it?

    Despite recommendations, RT remains underused in patients with CAD due to unsupported clinical claims regarding the potential excessive increase in haemodynamic during the exercise, lack of exact training recommendations or even no recommendations, and centre capacities.1 Therefore, to date only LL to moderate load RT (20%–60% of one repetition maximum (1-RM)) has been studied in CR when combined with predominantly used AT.1 Such RT intensities may present suboptimal stimulus for adequate improvement in maximal aerobic capacity and maximal muscle strength in comparison to superior effect of HL-RT (>70% 1 RM), as was previously demonstrated in healthy young and older individuals. In addition, the safety of HL-RT and LL-RT has been established only in already trained patients with CAD, which limits the use of both …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @TimKambic

    • Contributors TK is the sole author of this manuscript. The author would like to thank both supervisors for valuable feedback on the content of this manuscript.

    • Funding The PhD studies was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (fellowship grant no. 630-72/2019-1).

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.