Single- vs. multiple-set resistance training: Recent developments in the controversy

Galvao, D.A., and D.R. Taaffe. Single- vs. multiple-set resistance training: recent developments in the controversy. J. Strength Cond. Res. 18(3):660-667. 2004.-The number of sets in a resistance training program remains a major point of discussion and controversy. Studies prior to 1998 demonstrated inconsistent findings between single-set and multiple-set programs; however, recent evidence suggests that multiple sets promote additional benefits following short- and long-term training. The rationale supporting multiple sets is that the number of sets is part of the exercise volume equation, and the volume of exercise is crucial in producing the stimulus necessary to elicit specific physiological adaptations. The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of recent resistance training studies comparing single and multiple sets. However, it should be noted that studies to date have been conducted in young and middle-aged adults, and it remains to be determined if the additional benefits accrued with multiple-set training also occurs for older adults, especially the frail elderly.

Length of Stay, Discharge Destination, and Functional Improvement: Utility of the Australian National Subacute and Nonacute Patient Casemix Classification

Background and Purpose - Although implemented in 1998, no research has examined how well the Australian National Subacute and Nonacute Patient (AN-SNAP) Casemix Classification predicts length of stay (LOS), discharge destination, and functional improvement in public hospital stroke rehabilitation units in Australia. Methods - 406 consecutive admissions to 3 stroke rehabilitation units in Queensland, Australia were studied. Sociode-mographic, clinical, and functional data were collected. General linear modeling and logistic regression were used to assess the ability of AN-SNAP to predict outcomes. Results - AN-SNAP significantly predicted each outcome. There were clear relationships between the outcomes of longer LOS, poorer functional improvement and discharge into care, and the AN-SNAP classes that reflected poorer functional ability and older age. Other predictors included living situation, acute LOS, comorbidity, and stroke type. Conclusions - AN-SNAP is a consistent predictor of LOS, functional change and discharge destination, and has utility in assisting clinicians to set rehabilitation goals and plan discharge.

The role of BNP testing in heart failure

Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels are simple and objective measures of cardiac function. These measurements can be used to diagnose heart failure, including diastolic dysfunction, and using them has been shown to save money in the emergency department setting. The high negative predictive value of BNP tests is particularly helpful for ruling out heart failure. Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-II receptor blockers, spironolactone, and diuretics reduces BNP levels, suggesting that BNP testing may have a role in monitoring patients with heart failure. However, patients with treated chronic stable heart failure may have levels in the normal range (i.e., BNP less than 100 pg per mL and N-terminal proBNP less than 125 pg per mL in patients younger than 75 years). Increases in BNP levels may be caused by intrinsic cardiac dysfunction or may be secondary to other causes such as pulmonary or renal diseases (e.g., chronic hypoxia). BNP tests are correlated with other measures of cardiac status such as New York Heart Association classification. BNP level is a strong predictor of risk of death and cardiovascular events in patients previously diagnosed with heart failure or cardiac dysfunction.

Secondary prevention of cardiovascular events with long-term pravastatin in patients with diabetes or impaired fasting glucose - Results from the LIPID trial

OBJECTIVE- Diabetes, a major health problem worldwide, increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and its associated mortality. Evidence of the overall benefits of lipid modification in this area is needed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS- The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) trial showed that cholesterol-lowering treatment with pravastatin reduced mortality and coronary heart disease (CHD) events in 9,014 patients aged 31-75 years with CHD and total cholesterol 4.0-7.0 mmol/l. We measured the effects of pravastatin therapy, 40 mg/day over 6.0 years, on the risk of CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular outcomes in 1,077 LIPID patients with diabetes and 940 patients with impaired fasting glucose (IFG). RESULTS- in patients allocated to placebo, the risk of a major CHD event was 61% higher in patients with diabetes and 23% higher in the IFG group than in patients with normal fasting glucose, and the risk of any cardiovascular event was 37% higher in the diabetic group and 19% higher in the IFG group. Pravastatin therapy reduced the risk of a major CHD event overall from 15.9 to 12.3% (relative risk reduction [RRR] 24%, P < 0.001) and from 23.4 to 19.6% in the diabetic group (19%, P = 0.11); in the diabetic group, the reduction was not significantly different from the reductions in the other groups. Pravastatin reduced the risk of any cardiovascular event from 52.7 to 45.2% (21%, P < 0.008) in patients With diabetes and from 45.7 to 37.1% (26%, P = 0.003) in the IFG group. Pravastatin reduced the risk of stroke from 9.9 to 6.3% in the diabetic group (RRR 39%, Cl 7-61%, P = 0.02) and from 5.4 to 3.4% in the IFG group (RRR 42%, Cl -9 to 69%, P = 0.09). Pravastatin did not reduce the incidence of diabetes. Over 6 years, pravastatin therapy prevented one major,CHD event (CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction) in 23 patients with IFG and 18 patients with diabetes. A meta-analysis of other major trials confirmed the high absolute risks of diabetes and IFG and the absolute benefits of statin therapy in these patients. CONCLUSIONS- Cholesterol-lowering treatment with pravastatin therapy prevents cardiovascular events, including stroke, in patients with diabetes or IFG and established CHD.

Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy

OBJECTIVES This study was designed to predict the response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND Cardiac resynchronization therapy improves HF symptoms, exercise capacity, and left ventricular (LV) function. Because not all patients respond, preimplantation identification of responders is needed. In the present study, response to CRT was predicted by the presence of LV dyssynchrony assessed by tissue Doppler imaging. Moreover, the prognostic value of LV dyssynchrony in patients undergoing CRT was assessed. METHODS Eighty-five patients with end-stage HF, QRS duration >120 ins, and left bundle-branch block were evaluated by tissue Doppler imaging before CRT. At baseline and six months follow-up, New York Heart Association functional class, quality of life and 6-min walking distance, LV volumes, and LV ejection fraction were determined. Events (death, hospitalization for decompensated HF) were obtained during one-year follow-up. RESULTS Responders (74%) and nonresponders (26%) had comparable baseline characteristics, except for a larger dyssynchrony in responders (87 +/- 49 ms vs. 35 +/- 20 ms, p < 0.01). Receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that an optimal cutoff value of 65 ms for LV dyssynchrony yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 80% to predict clinical improvement and of 92% to predict LV reverse remodeling. Patients with dyssynchrony :65 ms had an excellent prognosis (6% event rate) after CRT as compared with a 50% event rate in patients with dyssynchrony <65 ins (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Patients with LV dyssynchrony greater than or equal to65 ms respond to CRT and have an excellent prognosis after CRT. (C) 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Determinants of exercise capacity in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE - Type 2 diabetes is associated with reduced exercise capacity, but the cause of this association is unclear. We sought the associations of impaired exercise capacity in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Subclinical left ventricular (LV) dysfunction was sought from myocardial strain rate and the basal segmental diastolic velocity (Em) of each wall in 170 patients with type 2 diabetes (aged 56 +/- 10 years, 91 men), good quality echocardiographic images, and negative exercise echocardiograms. The same measurements were made in 56 control subjects (aged 53 +/- 10 years, 29 men). Exercise capacity was calculated in metabolic equivalents, and heart rate recovery (HRR) was measured as the heart rate difference between peak and 1 min after exercise. In subjects with type 2 diabetes, exercise capacity was correlated with clinical, therapeutic, biochemical, and echocardiographic variables, and significant independent associations were sought using a multiple linear regression model. RESULTS - Exercise capacity, strain rate, Em, and HRR were significantly reduced in type 2 diabetes. Exercise capacity was associated with age (r- = -0.37, P < 0.001), male sex (r = 0.26, P = 0.001), BMI (r = -0.19, P = 0.012), HbA(1c) (AlC; r = -0.22, P = 0.009), Em (r = 0.43, P < 0.001), HRR (r = 0.42, P < 0.001), diabetes duration (r = -0.18, P = 0.021), and hypertension history (r = -0.28, P < 0.001). Age (P < 0.001), male sex (P = 0.007), BMI (P = 0.001), Em (P = 0.032), HRR (P = 0.013), and AlC (P = 0.0007) were independent predictors of exercise capacity. CONCLUSIONS - Reduced exercise capacity in patients with type 2 diabetes is associated with diabetes control, subclinical LV dysfunction, and impaired HRR.

CHARMed - the effects of candesartan in heart failure

The Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and mortality (CHARM) programme has already shown that candesartan is an effective alternative to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (CHARM-Alternative), that additional benefits can be achieved by adding candesartan to ACE inhibitors (CHARM-Added), and that in patients with a preserved cardiac output there are reduced hospital admissions (CHARM-Preserved). Further recent analysis of the CHARM programme has shown that of the cardiovascular deaths, the benefit of candesartan was due to a reduction in sudden death and progressive heart failure, and that these reductions were observed in the -Alternative and -Added but not -Preserved components. Combination of the CHAR M-Alternative and -Added trials confirmed this reduction of cardiovascular deaths, and also demonstrated that candesartan reduced hospital admissions. There were also improvements in the New York Heart Association functional class of heart failure in the -Alternative and -Added, but not -Preserved, components of CHARM. The benefits of candesartan in heart failure are maintained in the presence of an ACE inhibitor and P-blocker. So far, all of the findings with candesartan in the CHARM programme have been favourable/CHARMed, although the beneficial effects in patients with a preserved cardiac output are limited.