Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
ISSN: 1303 - 2968   
Ios-APP Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Androit-APP Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Views
9715
Download
282
 
©Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2016) 15, 424 - 433

Research article
Mean Blood Pressure Assessment during Post-Exercise: Result from Two Different Methods of Calculation
Gianmarco Sainas, Raffaele Milia, Girolamo Palazzolo, Gianfranco Ibba, Elisabetta Marongiu, Silvana Roberto, Virginia Pinna, Giovanna Ghiani, Filippo Tocco, Antonio Crisafulli 
Author Information
Department of Medical Sciences, Sports Physiology Lab., University of Cagliari, Italy

Antonio Crisafulli
✉ Department of Medical Sciences, Sports Physiology Lab., University of Cagliari, Italy
Email: crisafulli@tiscali.it
Publish Date
Received: 06-04-2016
Accepted: 13-06-2016
Published (online): 05-08-2016
Share this article
 
 
ABSTRACT

At rest the proportion between systolic and diastolic periods of the cardiac cycle is about 1/3 and 2/3 respectively. Therefore, mean blood pressure (MBP) is usually calculated with a standard formula (SF) as follows: MBP = diastolic blood pressure (DBP) + 1/3 [systolic blood pressure (SBP) – DBP]. However, during exercise this proportion is lost because of tachycardia, which shortens diastole more than systole. We analysed the difference in MBP calculation between the SF and a corrected formula (CF) which takes into account changes in the diastolic and systolic periods caused by exercise-induced tachycardia. Our hypothesis was that the SF potentially induce a systematic error in MBP assessment during recovery after exercise. Ten healthy males underwent two exercise-recovery tests on a cycle-ergometer at mild-moderate and moderate-heavy workloads. Hemodynamics and MBP were monitored for 30 minutes after exercise bouts. The main result was that the SF on average underestimated MBP by –4.1 mmHg with respect to the CF. Moreover, in the period immediately after exercise, when sustained tachycardia occurred, the difference between SF and CF was large (in the order of -20-30 mmHg). Likewise, a systematic error in systemic vascular resistance assessment was present. It was concluded that the SF introduces a substantial error in MBP estimation in the period immediately following effort. This equation should not be used in this situation.

Key words: recovery, exercise, cardiac output, stroke volume, contractility


           Key Points
  • The standard formula often employed to calculate mean blood pressure during recovery from exercise may introduce a substantial error in the estimation of this parameter;
  • This equation should not be used in this situation;
  • Instead a corrected formula, which calculates mean blood pressure taking into account the systolic and diastolic proportion during the cardiac cycle, should be employed.
  • No significant hypotensive due to exercise effect was detected using this formula.
 
 
Home Issues About Authors
Contact Current Editorial board Authors instructions
Email alerts In Press Mission For Reviewers
Archive Scope
Supplements Statistics
Most Read Articles
  Most Cited Articles
 
  
 
JSSM | Copyright 2001-2020 | All rights reserved. | LEGAL NOTICES | Publisher

It is forbidden the total or partial reproduction of this web site and the published materials, the treatment of its database, any kind of transition and for any means, either electronic, mechanic or other methods, without the previous written permission of the JSSM.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.