Author(s): Jaber J, Cirenza C, Jaber J, Amaral A, Almeida de Sousa JM,
Abstract Share this page
Abstract BACKGROUND: Current criteria for rate control in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment are empirical and based on a small amount of scientific data. HYPOTHESIS: This study was designed to analyze the influence of heart rate (HR, measured by the 6-minute walk test [6MWT] and 24-hour Holter monitoring) on quality of life (QoL). METHODS: A total of 89 male patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) and resting HR < 90 bpm were included. QoL (assessed by the Short Form-36 Health Survey [SF-36] questionnaire) was compared among 3 groups of patients classified by HR testing results: group 1 had HR < or = 110 bpm on 6MWT and < or = 80 bpm on Holter monitor; group 2 had HR in the target area by 1 but not both tests; and group 3 had HR > 110 bpm on 6MWT and > 80 bpm on Holter monitor. RESULTS: There were significant differences among the 3 groups in physical and mental component summary scores (285.9 +/- 73.9; 276.6 +/- 80.8; 230.3 +/- 91.0, P = .035; and 319.8 +/- 70.2; 294.7 +/- 76.0; 255.0 +/- 107.1, P = .026, respectively).When the methods were analyzed separately, there was a significant difference on QoL in physical and mental summary scores in patients with maximal HR < or = 110 bpm on 6MWT in comparison with HR > 110 bpm (P = .04 and P = .01, respectively) and in the physical summary score in patients with average HR < or = 80 bpm on Holter monitor in comparison with HR > 80 bpm (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Holter monitoring and 6MWT should be performed as complementary methods to better predict QoL. Copyright 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
This article was published in Clin Cardiol
and referenced in Journal of Neonatal Biology