English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Although the systemic changes caused by COPD are well known, respiratory mechanics changes, constant dyspnea, and, therefore, exercise limitation are of note.(1,2) However, for a long time, the major focus of therapeutic care was on the legs.(2,3) Even considering that the legs have an impact on exercise and on such elementary activities as walking, arm activities, especially those involving unsupported arm elevation above the shoulders, result in increased metabolic demand and increased activity of muscles such as thesternocleidomastoid muscle.(4,5) This might culminate in thoracoabdominal asynchrony, as well as in diaphragm and accessory muscle asynchrony, impairing ventilation.(4-7) When it comes to patients with COPD, this asynchrony tends to be even more evident, especially during unsupported arm activities, and these patients may often present with dynamic hyperinfl ation and exercise-related dyspnea.(6-8) Although, in the case of the legs, activities can be more objectively measured by using accelerometers placed at the hip or legs, information regarding how much and how patients move their arms is still considered limited.(8,9) Since an important systematic review of 41 studies that was conducted by Janaudis-Ferreira et al.,(10) some tests for measuring endurance and functional capacity during unsupported arm exercise, such as the unsupported upper limb exercise test and the six-minute pegboard and ring test (6PBRT),(11) have been recommended. The 6PBRT was developed by Zhan et al.(11) and is a very simple, inexpensive test that simulates well activities of daily living. During the 6PBRT, the patient has to move 20 rings (10 rings for each arm) from lower wooden pegs to upper wooden pegs, and, once all rings have been moved, he or she has to move them back. The 6PBRT result is expressed as the total number of rings that a subject is able to move back and forth between the sets of pegs in six minutes. Given that the 6PBRT has been validated(11) and found to be reproducible in healthy subjects,(12) it has become necessary and interesting, both from the standpoint of clinical practice and research, to determine reference values for this test. Pursuing this track, Lima et al.,(13) in a very elegant and well-designed study, conducted 6PBRTs on 104 healthy subjects in order to establish, for the fi rst time, reference values for this test in a healthy population. In the study, the subject distribution by age decade (from age 30 to 80-plus) is good and there is an appropriate male-tofemale ratio, which causes the proposed equation to have good external validity, allowing it to be generalized to any gender and age group. Although the study took into consideration arm length, upper arm circumference, and forearm circumference, as well as the level of physical activity, only age appears to have infl uenced the results obtained in the 6PBRT.

Reference values for assessing the arms: are we seeing a light at the end of the tunnel?