Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2023; 44(09): 650-656
DOI: 10.1055/a-2004-4669
Training & Testing

Accuracy of a Clinical Applicable Method for Prediction of VO2max Using Seismocardiography

Mikkel Thunestvedt Hansen  ‡
1   Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
,
Karina Louise Skov Husted‡
1   Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
,
Mathilde Fogelstrøm
1   Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
,
Tue Rømer
1   Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
,
Samuel Emil Schmidt
2   Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg Universitet, Aalborg, Denmark
3   VentriJect ApS, Hellerup, Denmark
,
Kasper Sørensen 
2   Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg Universitet, Aalborg, Denmark
3   VentriJect ApS, Hellerup, Denmark
,
Jørn Helge
1   Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Cardiorespiratory fitness measured as ˙VO2max is considered an important variable in the risk prediction of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Non-exercise ˙VO2max prediction models are applicable, but lack accuracy. Here a model for the prediction of ˙VO2max using seismocardiography (SCG) was investigated. 97 healthy participants (18–65 yrs., 51 females) underwent measurement of SCG at rest in the supine position combined with demographic data to predict ˙VO2max before performing a graded exercise test (GET) on a cycle ergometer for determination of ˙VO2max using pulmonary gas exchange measurements for comparison. Accuracy assessment revealed no significant difference between SCG and GET ˙VO2max (mean±95% CI; 38.3±1.6 and 39.3±1.6 ml·min−1·kg−1, respectively. P=0.075). Further, a Pearson correlation of r=0.73, a standard error of estimate (SEE) of 5.9 ml·min−1·kg−1, and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 8±1% were found. The SCG ˙VO2max showed higher accuracy, than the non-exercise model based on the FRIENDS study, when this was applied to the present population (bias=−3.7±1.3 ml·min−1·kg−1, p<0.0001. r=0.70. SEE=7.4 ml·min−1·kg−1, and CV=12±2%). The SCG ˙VO2max prediction model is an accurate method for the determination of ˙VO2max in a healthy adult population. However, further investigation on the validity and reliability of the SCG ˙VO2max prediction model in different populations is needed for consideration of clinical applicability.

Key words

maximal oxygen consumption - ˙VO2max prediction - test accuracy

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 23 December 2022

Accepted: 23 December 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
28 December 2022

Article published online:
05 June 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Ross R, Blair SN, Arena R. et al. Importance of assessing cardiorespiratory fitness in clinical practice: a case for fitness as a clinical vital sign: a scientific statement from the american heart association. Circulation 2016; 134: e653-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Blair SN, Kohl HW, Paffenbarger RS. et al. Physical fitness and all-cause mortality. a prospective study of healthy men and women. JAMA 1989; 262: 2395-2401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kodama S, Saito K, Tanaka S. et al. Cardiorespiratory fitness as a quantitative predictor of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events. JAMA 2009; 301: 2024-2035
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fletcher GF, Ades PA, Kligfield P. et al. Exercise standards for testing and training: a scientific statement from the american heart association. Circulation 2013; 128: 873-934
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Malek MH, Housh TJ, Berger DE. et al. A new nonexercise-based ˙VO2max equation for aerobically trained females. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36: 1804-1810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kaminsky LA, Arena R, Beckie TM. et al. The importance of cardiorespiratory fitness in the united states: the need for a national registry: a policy statement from the american heart association. Circulation 2013; 127: 652-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Myers J, Kaminsky LA, Lima R. et al. A reference equation for normal standards for VO2Max: analysis from the fitness registry and the importance of exercise national database (FRIEND Registry). Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2017; 60: 21-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sørensen K, Poulsen MK, Karbing DS. et al. A clinical method for estimation of VO2max using seismocardiography. Int J Sports Med 2020; 41: 661-668
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hansen MT, Grønfeldt BM, Rømer T. et al. Determination of maximal oxygen uptake using seismocardiography at rest. In: Computing in Cardiology 2021. IEEE 2021; 48-51
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mounsey P.. Praecordial ballistocardiography. Br Heart J 1957; 19: 259-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Sørensen K, Schmidt SE, Jensen AS. et al. Definition of fiducial points in the normal seismocardiogram. Sci Rep 2018; 8: 15455
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jones NL, Makrides L, Hitchcock C. et al. Normal standards for an incremental progressive cycle ergometer test. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985; 131: 700-708
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 König IR, Malley JD, Weimar C. et al. Practical experiences on the necessity of external validation. Stat Med 2007; 26: 5499-5511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Husted KLS, Fogelstrøm M, Hulst P. et al. A biological age model designed for health promotion interventions: protocol for an interdisciplinary study for model development. JMIR Res Protoc 2020; 9: e19209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Borg GA.. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1982; 14: 377-381
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Taylor H, Henschel A, Buskirk E.. Maximal oxygen intake as an objective measure of cardio-respiratory performance. J Appl Physiol 1955; 8: 73-80
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Edward T. Howley, David R. Bassett, JR. and HGW. Criteria for maximal oxygen uptake: review and commentary. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27: 1292-1301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Edvardsen E, Hem E, Anderssen SA.. End criteria for reaching maximal oxygen uptake must be strict and adjusted to sex and age: A cross-sectional study. PLoS One 2014; 9: 18-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hinkle DE, Wiersma W, Jurs SG.. Correlation: A measure of relationship. In: Hinkle DE, Wiersma W, Jurs SG, (Eds). Applied Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Boston, USA: Houghton Miffin Company; 1994: 103-128
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Malek MH, Berger DE, Housh TJ. et al. Validity of ˙VO2max Equations for aerobically trained males and females. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36: 1427-1432
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Wier LT, Jackson AS, Ayers GW. et al. Nonexercise models for estimating ˙VO2max with waist girth, percent fat, or BMI. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006; 38: 555-561
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Levine BD.. ˙VO2max: What do we know, and what do we still need to know?. J Physiol 2008; 586: 25-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Bassett DR, Howley ET.. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and determinants of endurance performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 70-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Arbab-Zadeh A, Perhonen M, Howden E. et al. Cardiac remodeling in response to 1 year of intensive endurance training. Circulation 2014; 130: 2152-2161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hellsten Y, Nyberg M.. Cardiovascular adaptations to exercise training. Compr Physiol 2016; 6: 1-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Zanetti JM, Tavakolian K.. Seismocardiography: past, present and future. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013; 2013: 7004-7007
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Morra S, Pitisci L, Su F. et al. Quantification of cardiac kinetic energy and its changes during transmural myocardial infarction assessed by multi-dimensional seismocardiography. Front Cardiovasc Med 2021; 8: 603319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar