This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cachovan, M. Articles by Cachovan, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cachovan, M. Articles by Cachovan, M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Randomized Reliability Study Evaluating Constant-load and Graded-exercise Treadmill Test for Intermittent Claudication

Waltraud Rogatti, MD

Franz Woltering

Andreas Creutzig, MD

Curt Diehm, MD

Heinz Heidrich, MD

Peter Scheffler, MD

M. Cachovan, MD

Abteilung Angiologie Herz-Kreislauf-Klinik Römstedter Str. 25 29549 Bad Bevensen, Germany

The aim of this randomized study was to compare the reliability of the treadmill test at constant-load (C-test, 3 km/hr; fixed grade of 12%) recommended in Germany with that of the graded-exercise test (G-test, 3 km/hr; increase in grade of 3.5% every 3 minutes) propagated in the United States.

In 50 patients with an absolute claudication distance (ACD) in the C-test of between 50 and 400 m, the two treadmill tests were carried out in randomized order on one and the same day, and repeated on 3 days within 1 week. For the initial claudication distance (ICD), the intraclass correlation was 0.88 in the C-test and 0.87 in the G-test. For the ACD the coefficients were identical at 0.91. The within-subject variation (CV_within) in the C-test and G-test was 25% and 27% for the ICD and for the ACD 24% and 21%, respectively. The between-subject variation was very similar with 72% and 73% (ICD) and with 78% and 68% (ACD). However, in ACDs below 100 m and between 100 to 150 m, the C-test showed significantly smaller coefficients of variation than the G-test: 13% vs 81% and 14% vs 50%, respectively. In conclusion, the results showed that both C-test and G-test are equally well reproducible.

Angiology, Vol. 50, No. 3, 193-200 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/000331979905000303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?