Practical equations to predict claudication pain distances from a graded treadmill test

Andrew Gardner, Michael A. Ricci, Terrence D. Case, David B. Pilcher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Treadmill testing is used to estimate the severity of claudication, but routine use is not practical or cost-effective in all settings. Thus, the purposes of this study were: (1) to develop and cross validate prediction equations for treadmill claudication pain distances in a heterogeneous cohort of peripheral arterial occlusive disease patients, and (2) to determine if the regression equations were more accurate in assessing claudication distances than self-reported distances of patients. Medical history, vital signs, resting ankle/brachial systolic pressure index (ABI), and claudication distances during a graded treadmill test were obtained on a validation group of 178 claudicants and on a cross-validation group of 94 claudicants. The independent predictors of claudication pain distances of the validation group were ABI, body mass index, gender, and current smoking status, with multiple correlation coefficients of R=0.73 and R=0.82 for the distances to onset and to maximal pain, respectively. These equations were successfully cross- validated on an independent group of claudicants, as the predicted distances to onset of claudication pain (167.2±102.6 m) and to maximal pain (354.6±154.3 m) were similar (p=0.99) to measured distances (169.1±127.8 m and 356.6±181.0 m, respectively). However, the self-reported distances to onset (89.5±126.3) and to maximal claudication pain (189.2±284.3) were 1-2 blocks less than either the measured or predicted distances (p<0.01). It is concluded that claudication pain distances during an incremental treadmill test can be more accurately estimated from a composite of variables obtained during medical screening than by relying on the self-report of patients. Consequently, in clinical settings where treadmill testing is impractical, the functional severity of claudication can be assessed without exercise testing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)91-96
Number of pages6
JournalVascular Medicine
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1996

Fingerprint

Exercise Test
Pain
Arterial Occlusive Diseases
Vital Signs
Peripheral Arterial Disease
Ankle
Self Report
Body Mass Index
Arm
Smoking
Exercise
Blood Pressure
Costs and Cost Analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Gardner, Andrew ; Ricci, Michael A. ; Case, Terrence D. ; Pilcher, David B. / Practical equations to predict claudication pain distances from a graded treadmill test. In: Vascular Medicine. 1996 ; Vol. 1, No. 2. pp. 91-96.
@article{a6d7c0093e214cb696a49b014acd3148,
title = "Practical equations to predict claudication pain distances from a graded treadmill test",
abstract = "Treadmill testing is used to estimate the severity of claudication, but routine use is not practical or cost-effective in all settings. Thus, the purposes of this study were: (1) to develop and cross validate prediction equations for treadmill claudication pain distances in a heterogeneous cohort of peripheral arterial occlusive disease patients, and (2) to determine if the regression equations were more accurate in assessing claudication distances than self-reported distances of patients. Medical history, vital signs, resting ankle/brachial systolic pressure index (ABI), and claudication distances during a graded treadmill test were obtained on a validation group of 178 claudicants and on a cross-validation group of 94 claudicants. The independent predictors of claudication pain distances of the validation group were ABI, body mass index, gender, and current smoking status, with multiple correlation coefficients of R=0.73 and R=0.82 for the distances to onset and to maximal pain, respectively. These equations were successfully cross- validated on an independent group of claudicants, as the predicted distances to onset of claudication pain (167.2±102.6 m) and to maximal pain (354.6±154.3 m) were similar (p=0.99) to measured distances (169.1±127.8 m and 356.6±181.0 m, respectively). However, the self-reported distances to onset (89.5±126.3) and to maximal claudication pain (189.2±284.3) were 1-2 blocks less than either the measured or predicted distances (p<0.01). It is concluded that claudication pain distances during an incremental treadmill test can be more accurately estimated from a composite of variables obtained during medical screening than by relying on the self-report of patients. Consequently, in clinical settings where treadmill testing is impractical, the functional severity of claudication can be assessed without exercise testing.",
author = "Andrew Gardner and Ricci, {Michael A.} and Case, {Terrence D.} and Pilcher, {David B.}",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1358863X9600100201",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "1",
pages = "91--96",
journal = "Vascular Medicine",
issn = "1358-863X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Practical equations to predict claudication pain distances from a graded treadmill test. / Gardner, Andrew; Ricci, Michael A.; Case, Terrence D.; Pilcher, David B.

In: Vascular Medicine, Vol. 1, No. 2, 01.01.1996, p. 91-96.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical equations to predict claudication pain distances from a graded treadmill test

AU - Gardner, Andrew

AU - Ricci, Michael A.

AU - Case, Terrence D.

AU - Pilcher, David B.

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - Treadmill testing is used to estimate the severity of claudication, but routine use is not practical or cost-effective in all settings. Thus, the purposes of this study were: (1) to develop and cross validate prediction equations for treadmill claudication pain distances in a heterogeneous cohort of peripheral arterial occlusive disease patients, and (2) to determine if the regression equations were more accurate in assessing claudication distances than self-reported distances of patients. Medical history, vital signs, resting ankle/brachial systolic pressure index (ABI), and claudication distances during a graded treadmill test were obtained on a validation group of 178 claudicants and on a cross-validation group of 94 claudicants. The independent predictors of claudication pain distances of the validation group were ABI, body mass index, gender, and current smoking status, with multiple correlation coefficients of R=0.73 and R=0.82 for the distances to onset and to maximal pain, respectively. These equations were successfully cross- validated on an independent group of claudicants, as the predicted distances to onset of claudication pain (167.2±102.6 m) and to maximal pain (354.6±154.3 m) were similar (p=0.99) to measured distances (169.1±127.8 m and 356.6±181.0 m, respectively). However, the self-reported distances to onset (89.5±126.3) and to maximal claudication pain (189.2±284.3) were 1-2 blocks less than either the measured or predicted distances (p<0.01). It is concluded that claudication pain distances during an incremental treadmill test can be more accurately estimated from a composite of variables obtained during medical screening than by relying on the self-report of patients. Consequently, in clinical settings where treadmill testing is impractical, the functional severity of claudication can be assessed without exercise testing.

AB - Treadmill testing is used to estimate the severity of claudication, but routine use is not practical or cost-effective in all settings. Thus, the purposes of this study were: (1) to develop and cross validate prediction equations for treadmill claudication pain distances in a heterogeneous cohort of peripheral arterial occlusive disease patients, and (2) to determine if the regression equations were more accurate in assessing claudication distances than self-reported distances of patients. Medical history, vital signs, resting ankle/brachial systolic pressure index (ABI), and claudication distances during a graded treadmill test were obtained on a validation group of 178 claudicants and on a cross-validation group of 94 claudicants. The independent predictors of claudication pain distances of the validation group were ABI, body mass index, gender, and current smoking status, with multiple correlation coefficients of R=0.73 and R=0.82 for the distances to onset and to maximal pain, respectively. These equations were successfully cross- validated on an independent group of claudicants, as the predicted distances to onset of claudication pain (167.2±102.6 m) and to maximal pain (354.6±154.3 m) were similar (p=0.99) to measured distances (169.1±127.8 m and 356.6±181.0 m, respectively). However, the self-reported distances to onset (89.5±126.3) and to maximal claudication pain (189.2±284.3) were 1-2 blocks less than either the measured or predicted distances (p<0.01). It is concluded that claudication pain distances during an incremental treadmill test can be more accurately estimated from a composite of variables obtained during medical screening than by relying on the self-report of patients. Consequently, in clinical settings where treadmill testing is impractical, the functional severity of claudication can be assessed without exercise testing.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029777360&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029777360&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1358863X9600100201

DO - 10.1177/1358863X9600100201

M3 - Article

C2 - 9546933

AN - SCOPUS:0029777360

VL - 1

SP - 91

EP - 96

JO - Vascular Medicine

JF - Vascular Medicine

SN - 1358-863X

IS - 2

ER -