Cited by 170Transplantation: Methods and OutcomesCardiovascular and exercise physiologyPhysical Activity and Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exercise Training After Lung Transplantation Improves Participation in Daily Activity: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access

Abstract

The effects of exercise training after lung transplantation have not been studied in a randomized controlled trial so far. We investigated whether 3 months of supervised training, initiated immediately after hospital discharge, improve functional recovery and cardiovascular morbidity of patients up to 1 year after lung transplantation. Patients older than 40 years, who experienced an uncomplicated postoperative period, were eligible for this single blind, parallel group study. Sealed envelopes were used to randomly allocate patients to 3 months of exercise training (n = 21) or a control intervention (n = 19). Minutes of daily walking time (primary outcome), physical fitness, quality of life and cardiovascular morbidity were compared between groups adjusting for baseline assessments in a mixed models analysis. After 1 year daily walking time in the treated patients (n = 18) was 85 ± 27 min and in the control group (n = 16) 54 ± 30 min (adjusted difference 26 min [95%CI 8-45 min, p = 0.006]). Quadriceps force (p = 0.001), 6-minute walking distance (p = 0.002) and self-reported physical functioning (p = 0.039) were significantly higher in the intervention group. Average 24 h ambulatory blood pressures were significantly lower in the treated patients (p ≤ 0.01). Based on these results patients should be strongly encouraged to participate in an exercise training intervention after lung transplantation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04000.x

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Langer, D., Burtin, C., Schepers, L., Ivanova, A., Verleden, G., Decramer, M., Troosters, T., & Gosselink, R.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Gosselink, R.
Venue
American Journal of Transplantation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-06
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1584-1592
ISSN
1600-6135 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2131033885
Cited by
170
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
11.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Transplantation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
lung transplantation, exercise training, supervised rehabilitation, functional recovery, physical fitness, cardiovascular morbidity, ambulatory blood pressure, quality of life, physical function, postoperative recovery
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Humans, Exercise, Lung Transplantation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review