Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Oct 8;13(19):5973.
doi: 10.3390/jcm13195973.

Reliability and Validity of the Rate of Force Development for Quadriceps in Older Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

Takuji Adachi  1 , Chubu Morishima  2 , Yuta Nojiri  2 , Yuki Tsunekawa  3 , Daisuke Tanimura  4 , Taisei Sano  5 , Kenichi Shibata  5 , Hideki Kitamura  6
Affiliations

Reliability and Validity of the Rate of Force Development for Quadriceps in Older Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

Takuji Adachi et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The rate of force development (RFD), which is the change in force over a period of time during muscle contraction, quantifies rapid muscle contractions. RFD may serve as a measure of physical rehabilitation in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, its reliability and validity in older patients remain unclear. This study examined the reliability and validity of quadricep RFD in older patients with CVD. Methods: This prospective study enrolled 30 outpatients undergoing cardiac rehabilitation (median age, 77 years) and 30 inpatients hospitalized for CVD (median age, 76 years). The quadricep RFD values at three time points (RFD50, 0-50 ms; RFD100, 0-100 ms; and RFD200, 0-200 ms) were calculated from the slope of the force-time curve. Physical performance was assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Intra- and inter-rater correlation coefficients were assessed for outpatients. The correlation coefficients between RFD values and physical performance indicators were assessed separately for outpatients and inpatients. Results: The intraclass correlation coefficients (1,1) and (2,1) for RFD50, RFD100, and RFD200 were 0.742, 0.893, and 0.873 and 0.810, 0.918, and 0.930, respectively. The correlation coefficients for SPPB with RFD50, RFD100, and RFD200 were 0.553, 0.547, and 0.597 (all p < 0.05), respectively, for inpatients; similar moderate correlations were observed for gait speed and the chair stand test. Conclusions: The test-retest reliability of the RFD was excellent in older patients with CVD. The RFD was positively correlated with physical function indicators, suggesting its validity as a measure of physical rehabilitation.

Keywords: aging; cardiac rehabilitation; cardiovascular disease; muscle strength; rate of force development.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Measurement setup for rate of force development for quadricep isometric strength.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient selection flowchart.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Correlations between physical performance and muscle strength indicators in outpatients (n = 30). Muscle strength indicators measured on the first day were analyzed. MVC, maximal voluntary contraction; RFD, rate of force development; SPPB, Short Physical Performance Battery.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Correlations between physical performance and muscle strength indicators in inpatients (n = 30). MVC, maximal voluntary contraction; RFD, rate of force development; SPPB, Short Physical Performance Battery.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Carbone S., Kirkman D.L., Garten R.S., Rodriguez-Miguelez P., Artero E.G., Lee D.C., Lavie C.J. Muscular strength and cardiovascular disease: An updated state-of-the-art narrative review. J. Cardiopulm. Rehabil. Prev. 2020;40:302–309. doi: 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000525. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kirkman D.L., Lee D.-C., Carbone S. Resistance exercise for cardiac rehabilitation. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2022;70:66–72. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2022.01.004. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abreu A., Frederix I., Dendale P., Janssen A., Doherty P., Piepoli M.F., Völler H., Davos C.H., Ambrosetti M. Standardization and quality improvement of secondary prevention through cardiovascular rehabilitation programmes in Europe: The avenue towards EAPC accreditation programme: A position statement of the secondary prevention and rehabilitation section of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2021;28:496–509. doi: 10.1177/2047487320924912. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Makita S., Yasu T., Akashi Y.J., Adachi H., Izawa H., Ishihara S., Iso Y., Ohuchi H., Omiya K., Ohya Y., et al. JCS/JACR 2021 guideline on rehabilitation in patients with cardiovascular disease. Cir. J. 2022;87:155–235. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-22-0234. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Prokopidis K., Isanejad M., Akpan A., Stefil M., Tajik B., Giannos P., Venturelli M., Sankaranarayanan R. Exercise and nutritional interventions on sarcopenia and frailty in heart failure: A narrative review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. ESC Heart Fail. 2022;9:2787–2799. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14052. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources