Effects of High-Intensity Inspiratory Muscle Training Associated with Aerobic Exercise in Patients Undergoing CABG: Randomized Clinical Trial

• Autor(a) principal: Miozzo,Aline Paula
• Data de Publicação: 2018
• Outros Autores: Stein,Cinara, Marcolino,Miriam Zago, Sisto,Isadora Rebolho, Hauck,Melina, Coronel,Christian Corrêa, Plentz,Rodrigo Della Méa
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-76382018000400376
• topic: Coronary Artery Bypass; Cardiac Rehabilitation; Quality of Life; Exercise Therapy; Physical Therapy Modalities; Breathing Exercises; Muscle Strength/Physiology; Oxygen Consumption/Physiology; Respiratory Muscles/Physiopathology

Abstract Objective: Evaluate the interaction between high-intensity inspiratory muscle training (IMT) and aerobic exercise on physical capacity, respiratory muscle strength, peripheral muscle strength, and quality of life of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods: Twenty-four patients underwent CABG were randomized into two groups. During 36 sessions, one group received IMT associated with aerobic exercise and the other group received only aerobic exercise. Primary outcome was the distance in the six-minute walk distance (6MWD) test. Secondary outcomes included respiratory muscle strength, peripheral muscle strength, and quality of life. Measures were taken at the baseline, at the 12th session, the 24th session, and 36th session. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in any outcome [6MWD - P=0.935; peak oxygen consumption (PeakVO2) - P=0.853; maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) - P=0.243; maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) - P=0.268; sitting-rising test (SRT) - P=0.212], but there was interaction in MIP (P=0.000) and all outcomes improved in the two groups (6MWD - P=0.000; PeakVO2 - P=0.000; MIP - P=0.000; MEP - P=0.000; SRT - P=0.000). Conclusion: There was an improvement of all outcomes in both groups, but IMT was not able to provide additional benefits. The use of this combination should be used with caution to not generate higher costs in the rehabilitation process of these patients.