scholarly journals Is a mechanical-assist device better than manual chest compression? A randomized controlled trial

2017 ◽  
Vol Volume 9 ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaiyaporn Yuksen ◽  
Thidathit Prachanukool ◽  
Kasamon Aramvanitch ◽  
Nuttamon Thongwichit ◽  
Kittisak Sawanyawisuth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Chest Compression ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Assist Device ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Manual Chest Compression ◽  
Mechanical Assist Device ◽  
Mechanical Assist ◽  
Better Than

scholarly journals High-Intensity Interval Circuit Training Versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Middle-Aged and Older Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 1805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ismael Ballesta-García ◽  
Ignacio Martínez-González-Moro ◽  
Domingo J Ramos-Campo ◽  
María Carrasco-Poyatos
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Continuous Training ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
High Intensity Interval ◽  
Better Than

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has similar or better effects than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in increasing peak oxygen consumption (VO2max), however, it has not been studied when HIIT is applied in a circuit (HIICT). The aim of this study was to compare the effects of a HIICT versus MICT on VO2max estimated (VO2max-ES), heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) of middle-aged and older women. A quasi-experimental randomized controlled trial was used. Fifty-four women (67.8 ± 6.2 years) were randomized to either HIICT (n = 18), MICT (n = 18) or non-exercise control group (CG; n = 18) for 18 weeks. Participants in HIICT and MICT trained two days/week (one hour/session). Forty-one participants were assessed (HIICT; n = 17, MICT; n = 12, CG; n = 12). Five adverse events were reported. Cardiorespiratory fitness, HR and BP were measured. The tests were performed before and after the exercise intervention programs. VO2max-ES showed significant training x group interaction, in which HIICT and MICT were statistically superior to CG. Moreover, HIICT and MICT were statistically better than CG in the diastolic blood pressure after exercise (DBPex) interaction. For the systolic blood pressure after exercise (SBPex), HIICT was statistically better than CG. In conclusion, both HIICT and MICT generated adaptations in VO2max-ES and DBPex. Furthermore, only HIICT generated positive effects on the SBPex. Therefore, both training methods can be considered for use in exercise programs involving middle-aged and older women.

Combined oral midazolam-ketamine better than midazolam alone for sedation of young children: a randomized controlled trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
THIAGO ANDERSON MOREIRA ◽  
PAULO SUCASAS COSTA ◽  
LUCIANE REZENDE COSTA ◽  
CRISTIANA MARINHO JESUS-FRANÇA ◽  
DENISE ESPÍNDOLA ANTUNES ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Oral Midazolam ◽  
Better Than

A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial of a Patient-Centered Ventricular Assist Device Decision Aid (VADDA Trial)

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 661-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin M. Kostick ◽  
Courtenay R. Bruce ◽  
Charles G. Minard ◽  
Robert J. Volk ◽  
Andrew Civitello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Ventricular Assist Device ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Assist Device ◽  
Ventricular Assist ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document