11/4/2013 The Submaximal Clin ical Exercis e Tolerance Test (SX TT) to Est ablish Safe Exercise Pr escr ipti on Parameters for Patients … www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3379719/ 1/12 Go to: Go to: Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2012 June; 23(2): 19–29. PMCID: PMC3379719 The Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test (SXTT) to Establish Safe Exercise Prescription Parameters for Patients with Chronic Disease and Disability Eduard Gappmaier, PT, PhD Author information ►Copyright and License information ► Abstract Purpose To describe how to perform a Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test (SXTT) as part of an exercise evaluation in the physical therapy clinic to determine an appropriate exercise prescription and to establish safety of exercise for physical therapy clients. Summary of Key Points Physical activity is crucial for general health maintenance. An exercise evaluation includes a comprehensive patient history, physical examination, exercise testing, and exercise prescription. The SXTT provides import ant c lini cal d ata tha t form the found ation for an effectiv e and safe exercise pres cripti on. Observ ations obtai ned d uring the ex ercis e evaluation will identi fy at-risk patients who should u ndergo fu rther medical evaluation before starting an exercise program. Two case examples of SXTTs administered to individuals with multiple sclerosis are presented to demonstrate the application of these principles. Statement of Recommendations Due to their unique qualifications, physical therapists shall assume responsibility to design and monitor safe and effective physical activity programs for all clients and especially for individuals with chronic disease and disability. To ensure safety and efficacy of prescribed exercise interventions, physical therapists need to perform an appropriate exercise evaluation including exercise testing before starting their clients on an exercise program. Key Words: exercise evaluation, clinical exercise testing, exercise prescription INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The health benefits of regular physical activity have been widely publicized. On the other hand, many clinical observations indicate that negative physical effects occur with inactivity. According to the 2008 Physical Activ ity Guidel ines for A meri cans, published by t he United St ates Department of Health and Human Serv ices, adults should perform at least 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity, or 75 minutes a week of vigorous- intensity aerobic physical activity, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic acti vi ty . Mode rat e-i nte ns it y aer obic physical ac ti vi ty has be en defined as 40% to 59 % of aerobi c capacity res erv e and vi goro us-intensity act iv it y as 60 % t o 8 4% of r es erve. Heal thy , as ymptomatic, previously inactive adults may begin moderate-intensity activity safely without the need to consult a health care provider. However, individuals with symptoms, chronic conditions, or disabilities are advised to begin an exercis e program af ter appropriate medical evaluatio n a nd with gu idance of a health care p rovi der. The American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) enthusiastically endorses the national effort to increase physical activi ty in all sedentary pers ons. Due to their extensive cli nical background , their experti se in exercise physiology and the movement sciences and the physical therapy patient management model with a 1,2(p vii) 2(p55) 1, 2, 3(pp viii,36,39,43,44 ) 4
12
Embed
Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test (SXTT)
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/14/2019 Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test (SXTT)
The health benefits of regular physical activity have been widely publicized. On the other hand, many clinical
observations indicate that negative physical effects occur with inactivity. According to the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, published by the United States Department of Health and Human Services,
adults should perform at least 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity, or 75 minutes a week of vigorous-
intensity aerobic physical activity, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic
activity. Moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity has been defined as 40% to 59% of aerobic
capacity reserve and vigorous-intensity activity as 60% to 84% of reserve. Healthy, asymptomatic,
previously inactive adults may begin moderate-intensity activity safely without the need to consult a health
care provider. However, individuals with symptoms, chronic conditions, or disabilities are advised to begin an
exercise program after appropriate medical evaluation and with guidance of a health care provider.
The American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) enthusiastically endorses the national effort to increasephysical activity in all sedentary persons. Due to their extensive clinical background, their expertise in
exercise physiology and the movement sciences and the physical therapy patient management model with a
focus on client-centered care, the physical therapist is uniquely positioned to assist people of all ages and
abilities to design and monitor safe and effective physical activity programs that help establish life-long habits
of physical activity.
Since persons with symptoms, chronic conditions, or disabilities may have limited exercise tolerance and are
at increased risk for adverse events associated with physical activity, they require a clinical exercise evaluation
to screen for potentially dangerous signs or symptoms of exercise intolerance and to establish safe and
appropriate parameters for their exercise prescription.
A maximal exercise test or clinical “stress test” is considered the gold standard to determine maximal exercise
capacity as a baseline for exercise prescription and to reveal potential signs and symptoms suggesting
myocardial ischemia due to coronary artery disease or other abnormal physiological responses to exercise.
These tests however require advanced expertise and equipment. They are associated with a higher risk for
complications due to exercise to the point of volitional exhaustion or occurrence of signs or symptoms of
cardiovascular compromise and thus may require medical supervision.
Standard submaximal exercise tests as described in ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription
and summarized by Noonan et al to estimate maximal oxygen uptake are based on several assumptions.
One primary assumption is that the maximal heart rate of the individual undergoing the test is similar to a
predicted maximal heart rate based on a formula such as “220-age.” Such formulae may be applied with
caution to healthy individuals as long as one is aware of the significant inter-individual variability (SD=10-12
beats/min) of maximal heart rate. However, many studies that measured maximal aerobic capacity of
persons with a variety of medical conditions such as cardiovascular, metabolic, neurologic or neuromuscular
disease found significantly lower maximal heart rates in these patient populations.
In addition, patients may be on medications that alter heart rate response to exercise. Another
assumption underlying standard submaximal exercise testing is that mechanical efficiency (oxygen
consumption at a given work rate) is the same for every person undergoing the test. However, many studies
on persons with chronic disease and disability, especially if neuromuscular symptoms are present, have found
a significant difference in oxygen cost for a given work rate as compared to healthy controls. Since
these assumptions which underlie aerobic capacity predictions based on standard submaximal exercise tests
are frequently not met when testing persons with clinical conditions, these tests are usually not appropriatefor these populations. The author therefore suggests that a “Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test
(SXTT)” is most appropriate in the standard physical therapy clinic to provide baseline data and to determine
safe and effective exercise prescription parameters. The purpose of this paper is to describe how an exercise
evaluation including a SXTT is performed and to discuss how the resulting data and observations are used to
determine an appropriate exercise prescription for clients seen in the physical therapy clinic.
THE EXERCISE EVALUATION
The objectives of an exercise evaluation include: first, to establish safety for exercise participation, second, to
collect the necessary information to write an appropriate exercise prescription and lastly, to collect baseline
data for outcome assessment. The components of an exercise evaluation are summarized in Figure 1. It is
recommended that clients obtain a referral for an exercise evaluation and prescription from their physician.
The physician may note valuable special precautions or considerations on the referral or may recommend
prior medical evaluation and testing of high risk patients. The pretest evaluation includes a comprehensive
patient history including a complete medical history, medication list, screening for heart disease risk factors,
signs and symptoms, and an activity history. This information is best obtained through a comprehensive
questionnaire that is completed by the patient before the appointment and then reviewed and clarified if
necessary during the patient interview. The physical therapy examination includes a standard
musculoskeletal and neurological screening examination as well as a careful cardiovascular and pulmonary
screening examination including assessment of resting heart rate and pulse, blood pressure, peripheral
vascular status, auscultation of heart and lung sounds, pulse oximetry, and ideally, in patients with increased
cardiac risk, a resting ECG. Special tests dependent on the client's specific diagnoses, impairments, andfunctional limitations may include functional mobility testing, quantitative strength assessment, body
composition analysis, pulmonary function testing, health-related quality of life assessment, and disease
specific assessments such as fatigue assessments for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, cancer, or
multiple sclerosis. While many of these tests may be optional, the minimum information that must be
obtained through the patient history and physical examination before conducting the exercise test includes
information to satisfy safety and test protocol considerations. Based on the cardiac screening and risk
assessment and initial risk stratification following ACSM guidelines, the physical therapist determines if
it is safe to proceed with an exercise test or if the patient needs to be referred back to the referring physician
for further medical evaluation and medical exercise testing. Contraindications to exercise testing are
summarized in Table 1. Based on the activity history, musculoskeletal exam, and cardiovascular and
pulmonary screening the therapist determines the optimal exercise test mode and the appropriate test
protocol. Finally, as should be standard practice today for any physical therapy intervention, an informed
consent document is reviewed and discussed with the client and signed before proceeding with the exercise
test.
Figure 1
Components of an Exercise Evaluation
Table 1
Contraindications to Exercise Testing
Test Protocol
When performing exercise evaluations in the physical therapy clinic, the clinician may face major challenges
when considering the “optimal exercise protocol.” The clinician will encounter a dramatic range of maximal
exercise capacities. We sometimes test patients with a peak exercise capacity of as low as 2 METs (ie, person
with severe cardiopulmonary disease who barely endures 2 minutes of walking at 1.5 mph) and occasionally
test physically active chronic disease patients with mild disability who easily achieve a peak intensity greater
than 10 METs. Furthermore, the clinician encounters a great variability in cardiovascular risk profiles. An
otherwise healthy client with chronic disease and disabilities may have no significant cardiovascular risk
factors while another client may have serious signs and symptoms of cardiovascular, pulmonary, or metabolic
disease. In addition the clinician may work with people with chronic disease and a wide range of
musculoskeletal or neuromuscular impairments. Conditions such as degenerative joint disease, chronic low
back pain, or other musculoskeletal pain syndromes may “flare up” when subjected to unaccustomed
increased physical demands. It should be obvious that no single “gold standard” clinical exercise testing
protocol (ie, Bruce Treadmill Protocol) will meet the demands of such a heterogeneous patient population.
This environment requires a highly individualized approach based on either a large menu of standardized
facility protocols or a custom design method driven by the pretest assessment of the individual client.
The first decision for the examiner to make is to choose the most appropriate mode of exercise for the exercise
test. While treadmills and cycle ergometers are most commonly used for clinical exercise testing, these
standard exercise devices are frequently not optimal for physical therapy clients if lower extremity
impairments or balance problems are limiting their lower extremity work capacity. For such individuals
combined arm- and leg ergometry results in higher peak work load, heart rate, and oxygen uptake
values. Due to testing and training specificity issues, it is recommended that the client, if possible, is
tested on an exercise device that is consistent with the preferred and available mode of training for the
subsequent exercise program. The main requirement for an exercise device used for a progressive testing
protocol is a reliable, repeatable, stepwise workload adjustment, ideally with the option to calibrate the power
input to assure accuracy. Based on experience and clinical judgment, the evaluator then defines an
individualized work rate progression for the respective client that will achieve the desired end-point within an
optimal exercise time of 8 to 12 minutes after a low intensity warm-up or chooses an appropriate testingprotocol from a series of previously defined facility protocols (see Table 2). When performing a treadmill test
on previously inactive, deconditioned clients, the author customizes the protocol to the individual as follows:
the testing protocol is started with 2 minutes at a “slow” walking pace to allow accommodation to the
treadmill. The treadmill speed may range from 1.0 mph (in rare cases even slower) to 2.5 mph. Over the next
few 2-minute stages the walking pace is advanced in 0.5 mph increments to a “brisk but comfortable” walking
speed. During subsequent 2-minute stages, intensity is increased by raising the treadmill grade in 2%
increments until criteria for test termination are achieved. This occurs in most cases within the recommended
time period of 10 to 20 minutes (including incorporated low-intensity warm-up) with a well-tolerated,
comfortable work load progression. When testing on upright or reclined leg cycle ergometers or all-extremity
ergometers (ie, Schwinn Airdyne™ cycle ergometer, NuStep™ recumbent cross trainer) we select one of 5
workload progressions based on the pretest assessment of the client that usually results in an appropriate test
duration with a well-tolerated work load progression (see Table 2).
Table 2
Generic Exercise Testing Protocols (Workload in Watts)
Measurements
Measurements obtained during each stage of a SXTT always include workload, heart rate, blood pressure,
and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and dyspnea. In addition, the client is continuously monitored for
abnormal signs or symptoms. When indicated by the client's history and diagnoses, oxygen saturation and the
electrocardiogram (ECG) may also be monitored.
Peak workload obtained with a maximal exercise test (“stress test”) is the best indicator of fitness and physical
work capacity. When evaluated in relationship to indicators of relative intensity and effort (heart rate, RPE,
dyspnea), the peak workload obtained during a SXTT may be used effectively to determine an appropriate
intensity for the exercise prescription and may allow for an estimate of physical work capacity (see discussion
of test endpoints and exercise prescription below).
Heart rate may be reliably monitored through palpation of a radial or carotid pulse or may be obtained
through auscultation, however, inexpensive telemetric heart rate monitors are very accurate and reliable as
long as electric interference is avoided and are much easier to use. Heart rate may also be obtained with anECG. Increasingly affordable ECG systems have the advantage of also monitoring heart rhythm and allow for
detection of abnormalities suggestive of myocardial dysfunction, both at rest and during exercise, which may
warrant further medical evaluation. In his wellness practice, the author has been detecting such rhythm
abnormalities during exercise evaluations on average in 1-2 clients (out of 50-60 exercise evaluations) each
year. All of these clients have been referred with negative cardiac history and medical clearance for exercise
evaluation and prescription by their physicians. Due to these abnormal findings these patients subsequently
have been referred back to their referring physicians with the recommendation for further cardiac evaluation.
Physical therapists can be at times intimidated by this technology, although essential ECG monitoring skills
can easily be acquired through a basic ECG interpretation course offered by many medical facilities,
publishers, or online education providers and some practice in the clinic.
Blood pressure should be measured at rest in sitting and in the exercise position followed by measurements
during each test stage and during recovery. Since most standard automated units are not reliable during
exercise, these measurements are best obtained through manual auscultatory methods.
At the end of each test stage, RPE is measured with a standard Borg or Omni RPE scale and
dyspnea ratings are obtained with a standardized dyspnea rating scale (see Table 3). Before the test,
patients are instructed to report any abnormal signs and symptoms they may experience du ring the test.
Throughout the test and the recovery period, the patient is carefully observed for signs and symptoms of
cardiovascular compromise such as substernal chest pain or other angina symptoms, lightheadedness, pallor,
nausea or sudden, unusual sweating or fatigue. Patients with chronic disease and disability also need to be
monitored for other clinical symptom changes such as exacerbation of pain in persons with arthritis,symptom modification due to increased core temperature in persons with multiple sclerosis, onset or increases
in tremor in persons with neurodegenerative disease, etc.
One of the most challenging questions when administering a SXTT is when to stop the test. The test is stopped
without hesitation if any of the indications for (maximal or “symptom-limited”) exercise test termination as
defined by the ACSM guidelines are met (see Table 4 and 5). In addition, any exercise test intended to be
classified as a “submaximal” exercise test should be stopped when a heart rate of 85% of age-adjustedmaximal heart rate (AAMHR) is achieved as per definition of “submaximal” by ACSM guidelines.
However due to their clinical condition or due to the great inter-individual variation of maximal heart rate,
the testing subject may reach volitional exhaustion before achieving 85% of AAMHR. This predetermined
“submaximal exercise test endpoint” is thus, in many cases, not relevant. In most cases the SXTT will be
terminated by decision of the tester based on predetermined test objectives, the tester's clinical observations
and the tester's clinical judgment of the individual's risk of adverse events. In order to determine an
appropriate exercise intensity for the exercise prescription, the tester needs an estimate of the subject's
maximal physical work capacity. Based on an integrated assessment of both physiological and subjective
indicators of subject effort (heart rate, dyspnea level, RPE rating), the experienced tester can usually predict a
reliable estimate of the subject's maximal exercise capacity thus meeting one of the primary objectives of thetest. This stage in the test will usually be 1-2 levels above the subsequently prescribed, ideal training intensity,
so that another objective of the SXTT is met: to demonstrate appropriate acute adaptations to exercise to a
level beyond the prescribed training intensity suggesting that the subsequently prescribed exercise parameters
will be safe for the client. Thus the SXTT should be terminated, once based on the administrator's subjective
appraisal the following two objectives are accomplished: first, an estimate of maximal workload is perceptible
and second, the intensity of exercise has been safely progressed beyond apparent moderate to vigorous
exercise prescription parameters. The confidence in making this somewhat subjective decision increases with
tester experience and the novice test administrator is advised to perform a number of tests under the
supervision of a more experienced tester to hone this skill. If this is not possible, then (s)he should proceed
initially cautiously with tests on low-risk individuals until confidence in making this decision appropriately is
gained.
Table 4
General Indications for Stopping an Exercise Test in Low-Risk Adults
Table 5
Indications for Terminating Exercise Testing
Safety considerations and contraindications
In order to ensure safety during exercise testing the tester needs to have adequate knowledge of exercise
testing and management principles, and understand and follow appropriate exercise testing guidelines as
summarized in the ACSMG. Absolute and relative contraindications to exercise testing are listed on Table 1.
Contraindications to exercise testing most commonly seen in our clinic are uncontrolled hypertension and
previously undetected rhythm abnormalities. The author recommends that the physical therapist require a
physician's referral with clearance for exercise participation before proceeding with an exercise evaluation.
However, it is important to understand that such a document does not assure the absence of undiagnosed
cardiovascular disease and risk of adverse events in response to physiological stress in previously sedentary
individuals. These conditions may not be ruled out by a review of the patient's history and a brief physical
exam in the physician's office. It is not unusual that a careful pretest screening and physical examination by the physical therapist reveals signs and symptoms of cardiopulmonary disease that would warrant a
cardiology evaluation in a client who presents with an appropriate physician's referral. In this case the patient
of the stage-by-stage progression of heart rate and work load during the test as well as physiological and
subjective indicators of effort throughout the test and especially during the last stage of the test. Based on this
estimate of maximal heart rate (HRmax-estimate) and work load (WLmax-estimate), the tester then
determines the intensity prescription for moderate-intensity exercise (40-60% WLmax-estimate or 40-60% of
HRR based on HRmax-estimate) for the initial training phase. This exercise intensity may be gradually
progressed to vigorous-intensity exercise (60-80% WLmax-esimate or 60-80% of HRR based on HRmax-
estimate) if tolerated well throughout the prescribed training duration without undue fatigue or exacerbation
of clinical signs or symptoms. Ideally, after completion of the exercise evaluation, the patient is monitored
during a subsequent actual exercise training session performed at the prescribed exercise parameters.
Depending on the physiological and subjective responses during this practice training session, the exercise
prescription can be adjusted if indicated.
Guidelines recommend that moderate-intensity exercise is performed for at least 30 minutes at least 5 times
per week or vigorous-intensity exercise for at least 20 to 25 minutes at least 3 times per week.
For severely deconditioned clients with chronic disease or disabilities, this volume of exercise will most likely
be unrealistic–at least during the initial conditioning phase–and duration and frequency must be adjusted
according to the individual capacity. It is crucial to start with a conservative exercise volume to avoid the
development of overuse injuries. It is always easier to increase an overly conservative training load than to be
forced to reduce training parameters or even abort the exercise program to allow for recovery from overuse
injuries. We usually start new clients with a conservative estimate of exercise duration based on our
observations of exertion and subjective fatigue during the SXTT with a recommended frequency of 3 times per
week with a rest day between exercise sessions. We tell clients to expect to be moderately tired after the
exercise session, but that we expect them to recover within a couple of hours after exercise. If fatigue or any
signs of discomfort persist into the next day, we recommend a reduction of exercise parameters. Depending
on the specific diagnosis, severity of disease, and level of disability additional special considerations may affect
the exercise management of the physical therapy patient. For example, patients with diabetes, especially if
dependent on exogenous insulin, will require more frequent glucose monitoring and medication adjustments
to compensate for the effects of increased physical activity. Patients with neurodegenerative disease such as
multiple sclerosis, may experience symptom modification or a temporary worsening of neurological symptoms
in response to an exercise induced increase in core temperature. A discussion of all these special disease-specific clinical considerations is beyond the scope of this paper and readers are referred to relevant literature
such as the ACSM's Exercise Management for Persons with Chronic Disease and Disabilities. Finally, the
physical therapist needs to remain aware about the potential day-to-day variability in the health status and
energy level of persons with chronic disease and disability that requires ongoing reassessment and adaptation
of program parameters and education on appropriate self-assessment and self-adjustment by the patient.
PATIENT CASE EXAMPLE 1 (see Figure 4 & video online at:
known to affect the cardiovascular response to exercise. His physical therapy examination reveals normal
strength and function in his upper extremities and marked weakness and spasticity in his lower extremities.
Based on his clinical impression the tester selects the Schwinn AirDyne™ arm/leg cycle ergometer as testing
mode for the SXTT with an individualized testing protocol starting at 20 Watts with a 20 Watt progression
per 2 minute intervals. Due to the patient's risk profile and history of palpitations, the evaluator chooses to
monitor the patient's ECG at rest and during exercise. Exercise test data are summarized in Table 6. Jerry's
resting heart rate is 68, his resting ECG displays a normal sinus rhythm, his resting blood pressure is 136/76,
which is slightly above ideal. During his first test stage, his heart rate increases to 94 and his RPE rating is one(“very light;” Borg 1-10 scale). His workload is increased to 40 Watts which causes a heart rate increase to
107. His blood pressure is recorded just slightly above resting at 138/78 and his RPE rating is 2 or “light.” The
ECG displays sinus tachycardia without abnormalities. During stage 3 at an intensity of 60 Watts, it becomes
obvious that Jerry relies primarily on his arms to maintain the work load. His heart rate increases to 117 and
his RPE rating is 4 or “somewhat hard.” His exercise ECG remains normal. The work load is further increased
to 80 Watts for stage 4 of the test. Jerry is obviously exerting significant effort at this intensity, which is also
reflected in his RPE rating of 7 or “very hard.” His heart rate increases to 136 bpm and his blood pressure is
recorded at 152/80. Mild to moderate exercise induced dyspnea is evident, rated by the tester as 2 (5-point
scale: “mild, some difficulty;” see Table 3). The ECG continues to show sinus tachycardia without any
abnormal waveforms. At this point it is obvious to the tester that Jerry has reached a workload clearly above a
reasonable training intensity for his current fitness level. One of the objectives of the SXTT has thus been
achieved: since there have been no abnormal signs or symptoms observed throughout the test, the
assumption, that Jerry will be “safe” when exercising at the (lower) intensity, which will be later prescribed for
his exercise program, should be warranted.
Table 6
Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test - Case Example 1 (Jerry)
Based on the tester's integrated assessment of the stage-by-stage observations of the physiological and
subjective indicators of subject effort (heart rate, dyspnea level, tester observation of patient effort, RPErating), the tester also feels quite confident at this point to provide a good estimate of Jerry's maximal exercise
capacity thus meeting the second objective of the SXTT. Based on the stage-by-stage observation of subject
effort by the tester, consistent with the apparently reasonable RPE ratings given by the subject, the tester has
the impression that Jerry would be able to advance to and probably complete the next 2-minute stage at an
intensity level of 100 Watts. However, by the end of this stage, he would probably reach volitional fatigue with
an RPE rating of 9 or 10 (very, very hard or maximal) and would most likely not be able to continue to the
next stage. The tester also estimates that his heart rate, which increased quite linearly during the first 3stages
and then increased in slope during stage 4, may have risen another 20-25 bpm during maximal effort. Based
on this SXTT, he thus predicts a maximal workload of approximately 100 Watts and a maximal heart rate of
approximately 160 bpm.
Based on these estimates he determines the following exercise prescription: Target Heart Rate (THR) Range:
105-125 bpm (40-60% HRR based on HRmax-estimate, rounded to nearest 5) with recommended THR: 115
bpm (50% HRR); initial work load: 50 Watts (50% WLmax-estimate). Recommended RPE during training:
3-4 (moderate to somewhat hard), not to exceed 4 (somewhat hard). Initial duration: 15 minutes plus 2-3
minutes warm-up and cool-down, gradually increased as tolerated to 30 minutes. Initial frequency: 3 times
per week with at least one rest day between exercise days. Jerry will be closely monitored during his first
training session and exercise parameters may be modified if necessary.
PATIENT CASE EXAMPLE 2 (see Figure 5 & video online at:
Linda is a 53-year-old research pharmacologist who received a diagnosis of definite relapsing-remitting MS24 yrs ago. Several years ago her diagnostic classification was changed to secondary progressive MS. Based on
her walking ability her EDSS score is 6.5, which is defined as “constant bilateral assistance (canes, crutches,
braces) required to walk about 20 meters without resting.” She uses a manual wheelchair or electric
scooter for energy-efficient ambulation when she leaves her home. In the past she has been moderately active,
however, she became more sedentary when she started to use a wheelchair one year ago and now presents
with a referral for participation in the University of Utah Multiple Sclerosis Rehabilitation and Wellness
Program. Except for MS she has an unremarkable medical history. Her medication list includes a MS disease-
modifying agent, an analgesic drug, and multiple dietary supplements. None of these medications are known
to affect the cardiovascular response to exercise. Her medical history and physical examination do not reveal
any significant heart disease risk factors, however, she reports a “history of PVCs” (premature ventricular
contractions) on her health history questionnaire. Her physical therapy examination reveals normal strength
and function in her upper extremities and marked weakness and mild spasticity in her lower extremities.
Based on his clinical impression the tester selects the NuStep Recumbent Cross Trainer as testing mode for
the SXTT with an individualized testing protocol starting at 40 Watts with a 10 Watts progression in 2 minute
intervals. Due to the patient's self-reported history of PVCs, the tester chooses to monitor the patient's ECG at
rest and during exercise. Exercise test data are summarized in Table 7. Linda's resting heart rate is 57, her
resting ECG displays a normal sinus rhythm, her resting blood pressure is 108/60. She tolerates the gradual
increase in work load from stage 1 to 5 well, which is reflected in her RPE rating that gradually increases to 5
(“hard”) by stage 5. Her blood pressure response is appropriate with a workload-related increase of the
systolic value as expected. Her ECG displays a sinus rhythm without abnormal waveforms or beats. Her heart
rate response is blunted from stage 1 to 3, then rises significantly during stage 4 followed again by only a small
increase during stage 5, in spite of a considerable increase in effort by the client (see Table 7 and video). At
this point in the test Linda is working quite hard, as can be observed by the tester and as reflected by her RPE
rating (5, “hard”). The tester may consider terminating the test at this point. The subject is obviously working
at a higher workload/intensity than she will train in the future based on the exercise prescription she will
receive later today. One of the objectives of the SXTT has thus been achieved: since there have been no
abnormal signs or symptoms observed during the test, the assumption that Linda will be “safe” when
exercising at the (lower) intensity, which will be later prescribed for her exercise program, should be
warranted. However, the tester has difficulty interpreting the non-linear, blunted heart rate response of this
client. At the end of stage 5, in spite of significant effort, her heart rate is only 103 bpm, which is only 62% of
her AAMHR. He decides to continue the test and progress to stage 6 with a work load increase to 90 Watts, which will be very strenuous for Linda. Based on his experience, he anticipates two possible responses which
would reveal valuable clinical information important for test interpretation. One possibility may be that the
increased sympathetic stimulation associated with the increased effort necessary to produce this workload
may result in a further significant increase in heart rate. The other possibility may be the absence of an
appropriate heart rate response in spite of the increased effort suggesting chronotropic incompetence,
possibly due to an MS-related autonomic neuropathy. As expected, Linda is exerting significant effort at this
intensity (see video), which is also reflected by her RPE rating of 7 (“very hard”). She is relying heavily on her
arms to maintain the workload. Mild to moderate exercise induced dyspnea is evident, rated by the tester as 2
(“mild, some difficulty”). The ECG continues to show a regular sinus rhythm without abnormal waveforms.
However, there is no further increase in heart rate, in spite of the valiant effort of the client, who reaches
volitional fatigue (“my legs gave out”) by the end of the 2 minute test stage. This SXTT thus evolved into amaximal exercise test that provides the following information: peak work load = 90 Watts, peak HR = 103
20. Witte KK, Cleland JG, Clark AL. Chronic heart failure, chronotropic incompetence, and the effects of beta
blockade. Heart. 2006;92((4)):481–486. [PMC free article] [PubMed]21. Wonisch M, Hofmann P, Fruhwald FM, et al. Influence of beta-blocker use on percentage of target heart
11/4/2013 The Submaximal Clinical Exercise Tolerance Test (SXTT) to Establish Safe Exercise Prescription Parameters for Patients …
29. Borg GA. Perceived exertion: a note on “history” and methods. Med Sci Sports. 1973;5:90–93. [ PubMed]
30. Noble BJ, Borg GAV, Jacobs I, et al. A category-ratio perceived exertion scale: relationship to blood and
muscle lactates and heart rate. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1983;15:523–528. [PubMed]
31. Utter AC, Robertson RJ, Green JM, Suminski RR, McAnulty SR, Nieman DC. Validation of the Adult
OMNI Scale of perceived exertion for walking/running exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36((10)):1776–
1780. [PubMed]
32. American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Guidelines for CardiacRehabilitation and Secondary Prevention Programs. 4th. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2004.
33. American Physical Therapy Association. House of Delegates Policies. HOD P06-06-12-09:
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; 2009.
34. Balady GJ, Chaitman B, Driscoll D, et al. Recommendations for cardiovascular screening, staffing, and
emergency policies at health/fitness facilities. Circulation. 1998;97((22)):2283–2293. [PubMed]
35. Franklin BA, Swain DP. New insights on the threshold intensity for improving cardiorespiratory fitness.
Prev Cardiol. 2003;6((3)):118–121. [PubMed]
36. Swain DP, Franklin BA. VO(2) reserve and the minimal intensity for improving cardiorespiratory fitness.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34((1)):152–157. [PubMed]
37. Tully MA, Cupples ME, Chan WS, McGglade K. Young IS. Brisk walking, fitness, and cardiovascular risk:
a randomized controlled trial in primary care. Prev Med. 2005;41((2)):622–628. [PubMed]
38. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale
(EDDS). Neurology. 1983;33:1444–1452. [PubMed]
Articles from Cardiopulmonary Physical Therapy Journal are provided here courtesy of Cardiopulmonary Physical Therapy
Section of the American Physical Therapy Association