Relation between derived cardiovascular indices, body surface area, and blood pressure/heart rate recovery among active and inactive Nigerian student

Abstract

Abstract Background The ease in the computation of derived cardiovascular indices, such as mean arterial pressure (MAP), rate pressure product (RPP), and pulse pressure (PP), makes them attractive for use in making clinical decisions for patient management in resource-deprived environments. This study sought to determine the relationship between these indices and heart rate/blood pressure drops during recovery state among physically active and inactive individuals following submaximal exercise. Results This quasi-experimental study conveniently sampled 105 apparently healthy male subjects aged 18–35 years of the University of Maiduguri. Intergroup categorization was executed by IPAQ. The derived indices were calculated using heart rate and blood pressure measurement while the body surface area (BSA) was determined using height and weight. The subjects performed a submaximal exercise test using a bicycle ergometer. Data analysis includes descriptive statistic, Pearson correlation, Student t-test, analysis of covariance, and multiple linear regression. The data was analyzed using SPSS version 25.0 at a significance of p < 0.05. The mean BSA and resting PP, MAP, and RPP were 1.84 ± 0.16 m2, 41.23 ± 7.57 mmHg, 85.92 ± 9 mmHg, and 8266.45 ± 1404.05 respectively. The resting RPP of the physically inactive subjects was significantly higher than that of the active (8742.71 ± 1496.31 Vs 7790.18 ± 1131.59, p = 0.00); however, the active subject had a higher resting MAP than the inactive (87.91 ± 7.98 Vs 83.93 ± 9.59, p = 0.03). A significant negative relationship was found between the RPP and the Absolute/percent recovery HR (r = -0.23, p = 0.02 Vs r = -0.34, p = 0.00). However, for the PP and absolute recovery SBP it was significantly positive (r = 0.22, p = 0.03) and also that of the MAP and absolute recovery SBP was positive (r = 0.33, p = 0.00). The best negative predictor of recovery HR was the RPP (β = −0.45, p = 0.00) while the MAP was the best positive predictor of recovery HR and SBP. Conclusions Overall, the physically active subjects coped better during the exercise than their inactive counterpart because of lower cardiac work and better blood perfusion to vital body organs. An inverse relationship was found between the RPP and absolute/percent recovery HR at 1 min post-exercise while a positive relationship was found between the PP and absolute drop in SBP/percent drop in DBP 1 min post-exercise. The best predictor of recovery in HR and blood pressure was the RPP.