Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
9
pubmed:dateCreated
1993-2-1
pubmed:abstractText
The repeatability of commonly used electrocardiographic (ECG) related autonomic function tests was investigated in 25 diabetic subjects, mean age 44 (range 18-67) years and mean duration of diabetes 10 (< 1-35) years. Tests were based on deep breathing, the Valsalva manoeuvre, relaxed normal breathing, and standing up from a lying position. All tests were repeated twice at each session, with two sessions separated by a mean of 5 (range 3-8) months. ECG and respiratory data were recorded for subsequent analysis. Maximum (max) and minimum (min) RR intervals and instantaneous heart rate (HR) were determined. The mean and repeatability data (within-subject standard deviation) for 21 different test results were calculated, and included deep breathing sitting (max-min)RR 226 +/- 39 ms and (max-min)HR 19.3 +/- 3.2 beats min-1, Valsalva manoeuvre 1.74 +/- 0.18, and lying-to-standing RR ratio 1.19 +/- 0.07. The within-subject repeatability to between-subject variability ratios consistently demonstrated that it is better to perform the deep breathing test sitting (with the smaller mean ratio of 0.37) rather than supine (0.46), with the use of three respiratory cycles rather than a single cycle (0.33 compared with 0.50 for (max-min)RR). A significant (p = 0.037) relationship was found between variability in heart rate changes and variability in air volume breathed during the deep breathing test.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Nov
pubmed:issn
0742-3071
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
9
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
799-805
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1992
pubmed:articleTitle
Autonomic function testing in diabetic subjects using sequential measurements.
pubmed:affiliation
Regional Medical Physics Department, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't