Loading…
Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study
The aims of this study were to assess the efficacy of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale based on the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) before exhaustion for the prescription of resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation and to compare it to the percentage of estimated one-repetition...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of cardiovascular development and disease 2024-12, Vol.12 (1), p.8 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2438-aff4a1f45c6cba4344353f911368f514149a70894edd024e0665a819dcfdef413 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 8 |
container_title | Journal of cardiovascular development and disease |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Gismondi, Alessandro Iellamo, Ferdinando Caminiti, Giuseppe Sposato, Barbara Gregorace, Emanuele D'Antoni, Valentino Di Biasio, Deborah Vadalà, Sara Franchini, Alessio Mancuso, Annalisa Morsella, Valentina Volterrani, Maurizio |
description | The aims of this study were to assess the efficacy of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale based on the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) before exhaustion for the prescription of resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation and to compare it to the percentage of estimated one-repetition maximum (1RM) prescription method. Sixteen male patients (age 60 ± 8) with history of coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to two resistance training rehabilitation protocols lasting nine weeks and consisting of three sessions per week, with the same exercise selection, number of sets and repetitions, and rest periods, but different load prescription method (RPE vs. %1RM). Patients' strength was evaluated pre- and post-intervention. Patients in the RPE group showed significant increases in strength across all the exercises of the protocol (leg press 24.25 ± 17.07 kg; chest press 7.25 ± 3.41 kg; seated row 13.88 ± 7.57 kg; leg extension 14.24 ± 4.53 kg; shoulder press 5.75 ± 4.06 kg; lat pulldown 7.50 ± 4.66 kg). Post-intervention between-group analysis showed no differences in strength gains (leg press
= 0.955; chest press
= 0.965; seated row
= 0.763; leg extension
= 0.565; shoulder press
= 0.868; lat pulldown
= 0.780) and trivial effect sizes (ES) for one prescription method over the other (leg press ES = -0.03; chest press ES = 0.00; seated row ES = 0.10; leg extension ES = -0.29; shoulder press ES = 0.18; lat pulldown ES = 0.05). RPE based on RIR seems to be an effective prescription method for resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation, showing similar efficacy to the standardized practice of percentage of 1RM. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/jcdd12010008 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_3390_jcdd12010008</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_42881a0d1ca642f7a97f534edfb3cd00</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>3159687526</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2438-aff4a1f45c6cba4344353f911368f514149a70894edd024e0665a819dcfdef413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkk1vEzEQQFcIRKvSG2dkiQsHAv7ajZcLKlELlYoalcLVmtjj1NFmHezdqP1f_MB6s6WknDxjv3myx1MUrxn9IERNP66MtYxTRilVz4pDLqiaCMnL53vxQXGc0ioTLGeU8ZfFgahVybmqDos_V9AhCY7MMRr0W7Tk9BZj50NLvkDKaQ6ucIOdH_YS8UOaMG6R_MKY-jRWth0sd57LFif_ePIdbv26XxMX4lDnUwetQXIdwbe-XZJ5xGSi3-zg7J5BtB5MZm9g4RvfwXDyiZyQuW9CR350vb17Vbxw0CQ8fliPip9np9ezb5OLy6_ns5OLieFSqAk4J4E5WZrKLEAKKUUpXM2YqJQrmWSyhilVtURrKZdIq6oExWprnEUnmTgqzkevDbDSm-jXEO90AK93GyEuNeRWmQa15EoxoJYZqCR3U6inrhTZ7BbCWEqz6_Po2vSLNdqhYxGaJ9KnJ62_0cuw1YxNqyp_WDa8ezDE8LvH1Om1TwabBloMfdKClXWlpiWvMvr2P3QV-tjmXo0U51LJTL0fKRNDShHd420Y1cN46f3xyvib_Rc8wn-HSdwD45vNqQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3159622484</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Gismondi, Alessandro ; Iellamo, Ferdinando ; Caminiti, Giuseppe ; Sposato, Barbara ; Gregorace, Emanuele ; D'Antoni, Valentino ; Di Biasio, Deborah ; Vadalà, Sara ; Franchini, Alessio ; Mancuso, Annalisa ; Morsella, Valentina ; Volterrani, Maurizio</creator><creatorcontrib>Gismondi, Alessandro ; Iellamo, Ferdinando ; Caminiti, Giuseppe ; Sposato, Barbara ; Gregorace, Emanuele ; D'Antoni, Valentino ; Di Biasio, Deborah ; Vadalà, Sara ; Franchini, Alessio ; Mancuso, Annalisa ; Morsella, Valentina ; Volterrani, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><description>The aims of this study were to assess the efficacy of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale based on the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) before exhaustion for the prescription of resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation and to compare it to the percentage of estimated one-repetition maximum (1RM) prescription method. Sixteen male patients (age 60 ± 8) with history of coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to two resistance training rehabilitation protocols lasting nine weeks and consisting of three sessions per week, with the same exercise selection, number of sets and repetitions, and rest periods, but different load prescription method (RPE vs. %1RM). Patients' strength was evaluated pre- and post-intervention. Patients in the RPE group showed significant increases in strength across all the exercises of the protocol (leg press 24.25 ± 17.07 kg; chest press 7.25 ± 3.41 kg; seated row 13.88 ± 7.57 kg; leg extension 14.24 ± 4.53 kg; shoulder press 5.75 ± 4.06 kg; lat pulldown 7.50 ± 4.66 kg). Post-intervention between-group analysis showed no differences in strength gains (leg press
= 0.955; chest press
= 0.965; seated row
= 0.763; leg extension
= 0.565; shoulder press
= 0.868; lat pulldown
= 0.780) and trivial effect sizes (ES) for one prescription method over the other (leg press ES = -0.03; chest press ES = 0.00; seated row ES = 0.10; leg extension ES = -0.29; shoulder press ES = 0.18; lat pulldown ES = 0.05). RPE based on RIR seems to be an effective prescription method for resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation, showing similar efficacy to the standardized practice of percentage of 1RM.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2308-3425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2308-3425</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/jcdd12010008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39852286</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia ; cardiac rehabilitation ; Cardiovascular disease ; Exercise ; exercise prescription ; Fitness training programs ; Mortality ; Muscle strength ; muscular strength ; Physical fitness ; Rehabilitation ; resistance training ; RPE ; Strength training</subject><ispartof>Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2024-12, Vol.12 (1), p.8</ispartof><rights>2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2024 by the authors. 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2438-aff4a1f45c6cba4344353f911368f514149a70894edd024e0665a819dcfdef413</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8421-5065 ; 0000-0001-7820-567X ; 0000-0001-5734-2325 ; 0009-0004-6374-6245 ; 0000-0002-2624-9213</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3159622484/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3159622484?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,25731,27901,27902,36989,36990,44566,53766,53768,74869</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39852286$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gismondi, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iellamo, Ferdinando</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caminiti, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sposato, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregorace, Emanuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Antoni, Valentino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Biasio, Deborah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vadalà, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franchini, Alessio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mancuso, Annalisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morsella, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volterrani, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><title>Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study</title><title>Journal of cardiovascular development and disease</title><addtitle>J Cardiovasc Dev Dis</addtitle><description>The aims of this study were to assess the efficacy of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale based on the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) before exhaustion for the prescription of resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation and to compare it to the percentage of estimated one-repetition maximum (1RM) prescription method. Sixteen male patients (age 60 ± 8) with history of coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to two resistance training rehabilitation protocols lasting nine weeks and consisting of three sessions per week, with the same exercise selection, number of sets and repetitions, and rest periods, but different load prescription method (RPE vs. %1RM). Patients' strength was evaluated pre- and post-intervention. Patients in the RPE group showed significant increases in strength across all the exercises of the protocol (leg press 24.25 ± 17.07 kg; chest press 7.25 ± 3.41 kg; seated row 13.88 ± 7.57 kg; leg extension 14.24 ± 4.53 kg; shoulder press 5.75 ± 4.06 kg; lat pulldown 7.50 ± 4.66 kg). Post-intervention between-group analysis showed no differences in strength gains (leg press
= 0.955; chest press
= 0.965; seated row
= 0.763; leg extension
= 0.565; shoulder press
= 0.868; lat pulldown
= 0.780) and trivial effect sizes (ES) for one prescription method over the other (leg press ES = -0.03; chest press ES = 0.00; seated row ES = 0.10; leg extension ES = -0.29; shoulder press ES = 0.18; lat pulldown ES = 0.05). RPE based on RIR seems to be an effective prescription method for resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation, showing similar efficacy to the standardized practice of percentage of 1RM.</description><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia</subject><subject>cardiac rehabilitation</subject><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Exercise</subject><subject>exercise prescription</subject><subject>Fitness training programs</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Muscle strength</subject><subject>muscular strength</subject><subject>Physical fitness</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>resistance training</subject><subject>RPE</subject><subject>Strength training</subject><issn>2308-3425</issn><issn>2308-3425</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkk1vEzEQQFcIRKvSG2dkiQsHAv7ajZcLKlELlYoalcLVmtjj1NFmHezdqP1f_MB6s6WknDxjv3myx1MUrxn9IERNP66MtYxTRilVz4pDLqiaCMnL53vxQXGc0ioTLGeU8ZfFgahVybmqDos_V9AhCY7MMRr0W7Tk9BZj50NLvkDKaQ6ucIOdH_YS8UOaMG6R_MKY-jRWth0sd57LFif_ePIdbv26XxMX4lDnUwetQXIdwbe-XZJ5xGSi3-zg7J5BtB5MZm9g4RvfwXDyiZyQuW9CR350vb17Vbxw0CQ8fliPip9np9ezb5OLy6_ns5OLieFSqAk4J4E5WZrKLEAKKUUpXM2YqJQrmWSyhilVtURrKZdIq6oExWprnEUnmTgqzkevDbDSm-jXEO90AK93GyEuNeRWmQa15EoxoJYZqCR3U6inrhTZ7BbCWEqz6_Po2vSLNdqhYxGaJ9KnJ62_0cuw1YxNqyp_WDa8ezDE8LvH1Om1TwabBloMfdKClXWlpiWvMvr2P3QV-tjmXo0U51LJTL0fKRNDShHd420Y1cN46f3xyvib_Rc8wn-HSdwD45vNqQ</recordid><startdate>20241227</startdate><enddate>20241227</enddate><creator>Gismondi, Alessandro</creator><creator>Iellamo, Ferdinando</creator><creator>Caminiti, Giuseppe</creator><creator>Sposato, Barbara</creator><creator>Gregorace, Emanuele</creator><creator>D'Antoni, Valentino</creator><creator>Di Biasio, Deborah</creator><creator>Vadalà, Sara</creator><creator>Franchini, Alessio</creator><creator>Mancuso, Annalisa</creator><creator>Morsella, Valentina</creator><creator>Volterrani, Maurizio</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8421-5065</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7820-567X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5734-2325</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6374-6245</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2624-9213</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241227</creationdate><title>Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study</title><author>Gismondi, Alessandro ; Iellamo, Ferdinando ; Caminiti, Giuseppe ; Sposato, Barbara ; Gregorace, Emanuele ; D'Antoni, Valentino ; Di Biasio, Deborah ; Vadalà, Sara ; Franchini, Alessio ; Mancuso, Annalisa ; Morsella, Valentina ; Volterrani, Maurizio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2438-aff4a1f45c6cba4344353f911368f514149a70894edd024e0665a819dcfdef413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Cardiac arrhythmia</topic><topic>cardiac rehabilitation</topic><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Exercise</topic><topic>exercise prescription</topic><topic>Fitness training programs</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Muscle strength</topic><topic>muscular strength</topic><topic>Physical fitness</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>resistance training</topic><topic>RPE</topic><topic>Strength training</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gismondi, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iellamo, Ferdinando</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caminiti, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sposato, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregorace, Emanuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Antoni, Valentino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Biasio, Deborah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vadalà, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franchini, Alessio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mancuso, Annalisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morsella, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volterrani, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of cardiovascular development and disease</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gismondi, Alessandro</au><au>Iellamo, Ferdinando</au><au>Caminiti, Giuseppe</au><au>Sposato, Barbara</au><au>Gregorace, Emanuele</au><au>D'Antoni, Valentino</au><au>Di Biasio, Deborah</au><au>Vadalà, Sara</au><au>Franchini, Alessio</au><au>Mancuso, Annalisa</au><au>Morsella, Valentina</au><au>Volterrani, Maurizio</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cardiovascular development and disease</jtitle><addtitle>J Cardiovasc Dev Dis</addtitle><date>2024-12-27</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>8</spage><pages>8-</pages><issn>2308-3425</issn><eissn>2308-3425</eissn><abstract>The aims of this study were to assess the efficacy of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) scale based on the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) before exhaustion for the prescription of resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation and to compare it to the percentage of estimated one-repetition maximum (1RM) prescription method. Sixteen male patients (age 60 ± 8) with history of coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to two resistance training rehabilitation protocols lasting nine weeks and consisting of three sessions per week, with the same exercise selection, number of sets and repetitions, and rest periods, but different load prescription method (RPE vs. %1RM). Patients' strength was evaluated pre- and post-intervention. Patients in the RPE group showed significant increases in strength across all the exercises of the protocol (leg press 24.25 ± 17.07 kg; chest press 7.25 ± 3.41 kg; seated row 13.88 ± 7.57 kg; leg extension 14.24 ± 4.53 kg; shoulder press 5.75 ± 4.06 kg; lat pulldown 7.50 ± 4.66 kg). Post-intervention between-group analysis showed no differences in strength gains (leg press
= 0.955; chest press
= 0.965; seated row
= 0.763; leg extension
= 0.565; shoulder press
= 0.868; lat pulldown
= 0.780) and trivial effect sizes (ES) for one prescription method over the other (leg press ES = -0.03; chest press ES = 0.00; seated row ES = 0.10; leg extension ES = -0.29; shoulder press ES = 0.18; lat pulldown ES = 0.05). RPE based on RIR seems to be an effective prescription method for resistance training in cardiac rehabilitation, showing similar efficacy to the standardized practice of percentage of 1RM.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>39852286</pmid><doi>10.3390/jcdd12010008</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8421-5065</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7820-567X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5734-2325</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6374-6245</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2624-9213</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2308-3425 |
ispartof | Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2024-12, Vol.12 (1), p.8 |
issn | 2308-3425 2308-3425 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_3390_jcdd12010008 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central |
subjects | Cardiac arrhythmia cardiac rehabilitation Cardiovascular disease Exercise exercise prescription Fitness training programs Mortality Muscle strength muscular strength Physical fitness Rehabilitation resistance training RPE Strength training |
title | Rate of Perceived Exertion Based on Repetitions in Reserve Versus Percentage of One-Repetition Maximum for Resistance Training Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T09%3A51%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rate%20of%20Perceived%20Exertion%20Based%20on%20Repetitions%20in%20Reserve%20Versus%20Percentage%20of%20One-Repetition%20Maximum%20for%20Resistance%20Training%20Prescription%20in%20Cardiac%20Rehabilitation:%20A%20Pilot%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cardiovascular%20development%20and%20disease&rft.au=Gismondi,%20Alessandro&rft.date=2024-12-27&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=8&rft.pages=8-&rft.issn=2308-3425&rft.eissn=2308-3425&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/jcdd12010008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E3159687526%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2438-aff4a1f45c6cba4344353f911368f514149a70894edd024e0665a819dcfdef413%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3159622484&rft_id=info:pmid/39852286&rfr_iscdi=true |