Open Access

The effects of a respiratory rehabilitation programme on body composition

Daniela Jipa-Dună

Daniela Jipa-Dună

  • ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy
  • ‘Marius Nasta’ Institute of Pneumophtysiology
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Jipa-Dună, Daniela
, 
Alina Croitoru

Alina Croitoru

  • ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy
  • ‘Marius Nasta’ Institute of Pneumophtysiology
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Croitoru, Alina
, 
Anca Emilia Bezdedeanu

Anca Emilia Bezdedeanu

‘Marius Nasta’ Institute of Pneumophtysiology
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Bezdedeanu, Anca Emilia
, 
Claudia Toma

Claudia Toma

  • ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy
  • ‘Marius Nasta’ Institute of Pneumophtysiology
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Toma, Claudia
 and 
Miron Alexandru Bogdan

Miron Alexandru Bogdan

  • ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy
  • ‘Marius Nasta’ Institute of Pneumophtysiology
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Bogdan, Miron Alexandru
  
Jul 27, 2020
The effects of a respiratory rehabilitation programme on body composition's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Download Cover
Article Category: General Reviews
Published Online: Jul 27, 2020
Page range: 29 - 36
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/pneum-2020-0008
Keywords
© 2020 Daniela Jipa-Dună et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Cycling during RR.
Cycling during RR.

Figure 2

Treadmill exercise during RR.
Treadmill exercise during RR.

Figures 3 and 4

Upper limb exercises.
Upper limb exercises.

Figure 5

Body composition monitor, Tanita BC-601.
Body composition monitor, Tanita BC-601.

Figure 6

Changes on average body fat distribution on body segments (%), before and after RR (p < 0.05, statistically significant).
Changes on average body fat distribution on body segments (%), before and after RR (p < 0.05, statistically significant).

Figure 7

Average muscle mass distribution on body segments (kg), before and after RR.
Average muscle mass distribution on body segments (kg), before and after RR.

Figure 8

Correlation between the 6MWT distance and the total fat mass before RR programme (r = 0.253, p = 0.138); r = Pearson correlation index; statistically significant for p < 0.05.
Correlation between the 6MWT distance and the total fat mass before RR programme (r = 0.253, p = 0.138); r = Pearson correlation index; statistically significant for p < 0.05.

Figure 9

Correlation between the 6MWT distance and the total fat mass after RR programme (r = 0.422, p = 0.042); r = Pearson correlation index; statistically significant for p < 0.05.
Correlation between the 6MWT distance and the total fat mass after RR programme (r = 0.422, p = 0.042); r = Pearson correlation index; statistically significant for p < 0.05.
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Medicine, Clinical Medicine, Internal Medicine, Pneumology, Clinical Medicine, other
Journal RSS Feed