Article Text
Abstract
Background Exercise testing in children is widely recommended for a number of clinical and prescriptive reasons. Many institutions continue to use the Bruce protocol for treadmill testing; however, with its incremental changes in speed and grade, it has challenges for practical application in children. We have developed a novel institutional protocol (British Columbia Children’s Hospital (BCCH)), which may have better utility in paediatric populations.
Aim To determine if our institutional protocol yields similar peak responses in minute ventilation (VE), oxygen consumption (VO2), carbon dioxide production (VCO2), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), metabolic equivalents (METS) and heart rate (HR) when compared with the traditional Bruce protocol.
Methods On two different occasions, 70 children (boys=33; girls=37) aged 10–18 years completed an exercise test on a treadmill using each of the protocols. During each test, metabolic gas exchange parameters were measured. HR was monitored continuously during exercise using an HR monitor.
Results Physiological variables were similar between the two protocols (median (IQR); rs): VE (L/min) (BCCH=96.7 (72.0–110.2); Bruce=99.2 (75.6–120.0); rs=0.95), peak VO2 (mL/min) (BCCH=2897 (2342–3807); Bruce=2901 (2427–3654); rs=0.94) and METS (BCCH=16.2 (14.8–17.7); Bruce=16.4 (14.7–17.9); rs=0.89). RERs were similar (BCCH=1.00 (0.96–1.02); Bruce=1.03 (0.99–1.07); rs=0.48). Total exercise time (in seconds) was longer for the BCCH protocol: BCCH=915 (829–1005); Bruce=810 (750-919); rs=0.67.
Conclusion The BCCH protocol produces similar peak exercise responses to the Bruce protocol and provides an alternative for clinical exercise testing in children.
- pediatrics
- treadmill protocol
- validation
- cardiorespiratory function
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Acknowledgements We thank our study participants for volunteering their time to complete the study. The results of the study are presented clearly, honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
Funding This study was supported by funding from the Douglas College Research and Scholarly Activity Fund Research Incentive Grant.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval University of British Columbia Children's and Women's Health Centre of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.