Stress Test Tomorrow-Apprehensive
10-10-13, 05:36 AM
#26
Rolling roadblock
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Casselberry, FL
Posts: 160
Bikes: 2013 Specialized Sirrus Comp
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I've done two this year and was disappointed to learn they are looking for EKG data that points to problems and that information is obtained well below an exercise level that is a stress for me. A stress test may be hard for somebody in bad physical condition but I regularly push myself as hard (and harder) than I got to in my stress test. I'm doing a follow up stress test today after a stent was put in last week. They asked me to not eat for 4 hours prior to the test and I finally got them to explain it was because some people threw up. I laughed. It's just ten minutes of a hard effort. Today's goal will be to get them to let me continue pushing to a real, stressful, maximum effort and for me that is WAY beyond the point where they normally stop.
10-10-13, 01:08 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Further North than U
Posts: 2,000
Bikes: Spec Roubaix, three Fisher Montare, two Pugs
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
This time they let me continue walking until I reached 100% of my predicted (220-age) max HR. I did it with no problem. I was working hard but got there. Happily I showed no issues. I promptly left, picked up my gear and went to spinning class where I hit three or four beats above that predicted max HR on 5 occasions during the class. I was glad my doc allowed me to push to that degree during the test. I was much more confident that I was safe in doing so in spinning class. I don't let myself get that sweated up during outdoor winter rides but I'll continue to do HIIT work in spinning class.
10-10-13, 02:08 PM
#28
Senior Member
Yeah, a stress test isn't really. Doc took me up to about 140 or 150, then back down. Heck, I do that even on easy rides. I even asked if we could try to find my MHR was, but that was too much effort... for THEM. Or maybe they didn't want to wear out their nice treadmill.
10-10-13, 02:54 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: SW Fl.
Posts: 5,620
Bikes: Day6 Semi Recumbent "FIREBALL", 1981 Custom Touring Paramount, 1983 Road Paramount, 2013 Giant Propel Advanced SL3, 2018 Specialized Red Roubaix Expert mech., 2002 Magna 7sp hybrid, 1976 Bassett Racing 45sp Cruiser
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1069 Post(s)
Liked 788 Times
in
505 Posts
This time they let me continue walking until I reached 100% of my predicted (220-age) max HR. I did it with no problem. I was working hard but got there. Happily I showed no issues. I promptly left, picked up my gear and went to spinning class where I hit three or four beats above that predicted max HR on 5 occasions during the class. I was glad my doc allowed me to push to that degree during the test. I was much more confident that I was safe in doing so in spinning class. I don't let myself get that sweated up during outdoor winter rides but I'll continue to do HIIT work in spinning class.
10-10-13, 03:26 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Further North than U
Posts: 2,000
Bikes: Spec Roubaix, three Fisher Montare, two Pugs
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Yeah...they used that formula. I think it's pretty common. It's not like they are actually attempting to determine a persons real max HR. This isn't a sports medicine evaluation where they are setting training goals based on an actual max HR. As the previous poster noted, they are simply looking for signs of heart damage and for that they want to push you a bit...and see how your heart reacts. They could probably do it with any number of formulas that would ensure the patient has to sweat a bit and get his/her heart rate up a bit. In this case, it's a perfectly valid number to use since the results in no way depend on the 220-age actually reflecting the patients true max HR. The "real" max hr is entirely meaningless to determining if ischemia is present.
10-11-13, 05:35 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
The stress test is done on a treadmill and makes a rider do a run. That's what most riders stress about. Runners are different; they enjoy the running for the sake of running.
The physician is supposed to ramp up the speed in intervals but once you get to a high rate, they speed up the interval. I figure they have sufficient data and just want to hit some kind of max and call it quits. Too bad for the rider.
The physician is supposed to ramp up the speed in intervals but once you get to a high rate, they speed up the interval. I figure they have sufficient data and just want to hit some kind of max and call it quits. Too bad for the rider.
10-11-13, 05:48 AM
#32
Senior Member
I find my knees give out long before I hit their 80% heart rate number, They have to get me to level 4 or 5 to get into the 140's.
10-11-13, 12:31 PM
#33
Northern Rider
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 435
Bikes: 1999 Litespeed Tuscany 105, 2007 Marin Palisades Trail, 2006 Burley Duet tandem
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked 811 Times
in
203 Posts
I was expecting mine to be a golden opportunity to get an official max HR but it was really just a walk on the belt-they told me to stop "pushing" the machine and just to go at its pace. I wasn't even getting out of breath when they told me that would be fine - quite a disappointment, except that it turned out my heart was fine!
10-11-13, 12:53 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,712
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My understanding from several cardiologists is that if a person takes enough physical stress tests they will show an abnormality that is actually a false indication. Generally, it is a rhythm that runs a bit longer than "standard". On the other hand a nuclear stress test is a direct view of the blood vessels and is a bit more reliable, if way more expensive. Plus, the radioactive material takes a while to wash out of the body so don't want to be around kids, etc. during that time.
There is an adage that goes something like this: Treat the patient, not the indication. It applies to a lot of situations, especially stress tests.
There is an adage that goes something like this: Treat the patient, not the indication. It applies to a lot of situations, especially stress tests.
10-11-13, 12:56 PM
#35
Senior Member
10-11-13, 07:18 PM
#36
Senior Member
I think my first stress test was around age 50. On that one, the doc took me up to 170. Me and my big mouth, it must have been the endorphins -- I was starting to feel GOOD, and I said, "Yeah, lets do sprints!" That was the doc's cue to shut 'er down. 
10-12-13, 07:22 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,897
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1866 Post(s)
Liked 665 Times
in
507 Posts
Yeah, a stress test isn't really. Doc took me up to about 140 or 150, then back down. Heck, I do that even on easy rides. I even asked if we could try to find my MHR was, but that was too much effort... for THEM. Or maybe they didn't want to wear out their nice treadmill.
10-12-13, 10:23 PM
#38
Fred
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Woodstock, GA
Posts: 220
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac Comp, Trek 4100, Specialized Allez Elite, Kickr Snap
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Yes, that formula is the standard for the Bruce Protocol, which is what they use for stress tests. I easily hit my "Bruce" max HR during the stress test, but the doc didn't let me get much above that. I know I exceed it regularly on most of my rides.
The formula is controversial, but still the diagnostic standard. A somewhat more accurate forumla (especially for older folks) is 206.9 - (0.67 x age).
The formula is controversial, but still the diagnostic standard. A somewhat more accurate forumla (especially for older folks) is 206.9 - (0.67 x age).
