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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cardiovascular development and disease 2024-12, Vol.12 (1), p.8
Main Authors: 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
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 &amp; 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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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