NCT06796582

Reliability of Multiple-Repetition-Maximum Tests in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease or Risk Factors

Agreement of the Estimated 1-Repetition-Maximum Between Two Multiple-Repetition-Maximum Tests with Different Weight in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease or Risk Factors

• Status: Not Yet Recruiting
• Phase: —
• Study type: Observational
• Enrollment: 50 (estimated)
• Sponsor: Technical University of Munich · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 50 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Exercise training is a cornerstone in the prevention and rehabilitation of cardiovascular disease. While research has primarily focused on endurance training, resistance training becomes more and more important. The gold standard to prescribe resistance training intensity or monitor longitudinal changes is the 1-Repetition-Maximum (1-RM) test. However, particularly for unexperienced individuals, this test may not be recommendable due to the high load and an increased risk of injuries. Alternatively, there are several published formulas to estimate the 1-RM based on a multiple-repetition-maximum (or repetition-to-failure) test. However, these formulas have been primarily tested in healthy individuals. Moreover, the reliability of the 1-RM estimation based on two tests with different submaximal weight is unknown. Therefore, the present study evaluates the agreement of the 1-RM estimation (based on different formulas) between two Multiple-RM tests with different weight in 50 patients with cardiovascular disease (heart failure, coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation) or cardiovascular risk factors (type 2 diabetes, arterial hypertension).

Conditions

• Heart Failure
• Coronary Heart Disease (CHD)
• Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
• Diabetes Mellitus
• Arterial Hypertension

Timeline

• Start date: 2025-02-01
• Primary completion: 2025-06-01
• Completion: 2025-06-01
• First posted: 2025-01-28
• Last updated: 2025-01-29