Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Clinical Rehabilitation: Validity of Field Exercise Tests and Patient-Reported Questionnaires.

Created on 16 Jun 2026

Authors

Renske Meijer, Goof Schep, Marta Regis, Femke de Jager, Anouk T R Weemaes, Bart C Bongers, Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse, Hans H C M Savelberg, Martijn van Hooff

Published in

American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation. Jun 02, 2026. Epub Jun 02, 2026.

Abstract

To evaluate criterion and construct validity of field exercise tests and patient-reported questionnaires compared with cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to estimate cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in clinical rehabilitation.
Participants were included at the start of a cardiopulmonary or oncologic rehabilitation program. All patients performed a CPET, steep ramp test (SRT), and 6-minute walk test (6-MWT) and completed the Duke activity status index (DASI), veterans-specific activity questionnaire (VSAQ), and FitMáx© questionnaire (FitMáx). Work rate at peak exercise at the SRT (SRT-WRpeak), distance walked at the 6-MWT (6-MWD), and oxygen uptake at peak exercise (VO2peak) estimated by the questionnaires were compared with measured VO2peak during CPET.
Sixty-nine patients (57% female) were included, with a median (IQR) age of 58 (46-66) years. Correlations of SRT-WRpeak and 6-MWD with CPET-VO2peak were ρ=0.87 (95%-CI 0.78-0.92) and ρ=0.40 (95%-CI 0.17-0.58), respectively. Correlations of DASI-VO2peak, VSAQ-VO2peak, and FitMáx-VO2peak with CPET-VO2peak were ρ=0.37 (95%-CI 0.13-0.56), ρ=0.51 (95%-CI 0.30-0.68), and ρ=0.78 (95%-CI 0.65-0.87), respectively.
SRT-WRpeak and FitMáx-VO2peak strongly correlated with CPET-VO2peak, whereas the 6-MWD, DASI-VO2peak and VSAQ-VO2peak showed a moderate correlation. Consequently, the SRT and FitMáx are considered the best alternative exercise test and questionnaire to estimate CRF when CPET is not feasible.

PMID:
42296456
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 16 Jun 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement