IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0171063.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Long-term pulse wave velocity outcomes with aerobic and resistance training in kidney transplant recipients – A pilot randomised controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Ellen M O’Connor
  • Pelagia Koufaki
  • Thomas H Mercer
  • Herolin Lindup
  • Eilish Nugent
  • David Goldsmith
  • Iain C Macdougall
  • Sharlene A Greenwood

Abstract

Background: This pilot study examined long-term pulse wave velocity (PWV) and peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) outcomes following a 12-week moderate-intensity aerobic or resistance training programme in kidney transplant recipients. Method: Single-blind, bi-centre randomised controlled parallel trial. 42 out of 60 participants completed a 9-month follow-up assessment (Aerobic training = 12, Resistance training = 10 and usual care = 20). Participants completed 12 weeks of twice-weekly supervised aerobic or resistance training. Following the 12-week exercise intervention, participants were transitioned to self-managed community exercise activity using motivational interviewing techniques. Usual care participants received usual encouragement for physical activity during routine clinical appointments in the transplant clinic. PWV, VO2peak, blood pressure and body weight were assessed at 12 weeks and 12 months, and compared to baseline. Results: ANCOVA analysis, covarying for baseline values, age, and length of time on dialysis pre-transplantation, revealed a significant mean between-group difference in PWV of -1.30 m/sec (95%CI -2.44 to -0.17, p = 0.03) between resistance training and usual care groups. When comparing the aerobic training and usual care groups at 9-month follow-up, there was a mean difference of -1.05 m/sec (95%CI -2.11 to 0.017, p = 0.05). A significant mean between-group difference in relative VO2peak values of 2.2 ml/kg/min (95% CI 0.37 to 4.03, p = 0.02) when comparing aerobic training with usual care was revealed. There was no significant between group differences in body weight or blood pressure. There were no significant adverse effects associated with the interventions. Conclusions: Significant between-group differences in 9-month follow-up PWV existed when comparing resistance exercise intervention with usual care. A long-term between-group difference in VO2peak was only evident when comparing aerobic intervention with usual care. This pilot study, with a small sample size, did not aim to elucidate mechanistic mediators related to the exercise interventions. It is however suggested that a motivational interviewing approach, combined with appropriate transition to community training programmes, could maintain the improvements gained from the 12-week exercise interventions and further research in this area is therefore warranted. Trial registration: study number: ISRCTN43892586.

Suggested Citation

  • Ellen M O’Connor & Pelagia Koufaki & Thomas H Mercer & Herolin Lindup & Eilish Nugent & David Goldsmith & Iain C Macdougall & Sharlene A Greenwood, 2017. "Long-term pulse wave velocity outcomes with aerobic and resistance training in kidney transplant recipients – A pilot randomised controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171063
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171063
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171063&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0171063?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.