Search

Additional file 8: Supplemental Document 2. CONSORT checklist.

Additional file 4: Supplemental Table 2. SIT LESS intervention characteristics.

Additional file 7: Supplemental Document 1. SIT LESS manual.

Additional file 2: Supplemental Figure 2. Longitudinal sedentary time (panel A) and prolonged sedentary bouts (≥ 30 min) (panel B) during SIT LESS based on the activity tracker data (SIT LESS group). Data are presented as median with interquartile range. The dashed line in panel A represents the upper-limit of normal daily sedentary time (9.5 hours per day). P-values are based on mixed model analysis to assess changes in sedentary behaviour during the intervention period using random intercepts with time as continuous variable, ranging from week 1 to week 12.

Additional file 3: Supplemental Table 1. Cardiac rehabilitation characteristics.

Additional file 5: Supplemental Table 3. Reasons for premature discontinuation SIT LESS activity tracker.

Additional file 9: Supplemental Document 3. TIDieR.

Additional file 6: Supplemental Table 4. Quality of life, self-efficacy and cardiovascular risk score.

Additional file 1: Supplemental Figure 1. Forest plot with stratified mixed model analyses on the impact of SIT LESS on changes in sedentary time from pre- to post-CR, the black squares indicate the estimates and the lines represent the 95% confidence intervals of the estimate. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; NSTEMI: non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction; PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; STEMI: ST-elevation myocardial infarction; (U)AP: (unstable) angina pectoris.

Background:The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether unilateral intracompartmental pressure (ICP) measurements correctly represent the contralateral ICP value in patients suspected to have bilateral chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS) in the anterior compartment of the leg.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was performed that included military service members who had been referred to a secondary care department for bilateral anterolateral exercise-related leg pain. The obtained ICP values were utilized to assess 2 possible measurement strategies to perform unilateral ICP measurements: the right-leg strategy (i.e., always testing the right leg) and the most-symptomatic-leg strategy (i.e., always testing the most symptomatic). The diagnostic cutoff value for CECS in this cohort was 35 mmHg in the first minute after provocation. Four outcome categories were created to describe the pressure classification of the second leg if only 1 leg would have been measured: correct (category 1: both values ≥35 mmHg; category 2: both values 5 mmHg from the 35-mmHg cutoff value compared with 40% of the 52 patients in categories 3 and 4.Conclusions:In military service members with bilateral chronic anterolateral exertional pain, a unilateral ICP measurement seems to be justified, especially among those with pressure values >5 mmHg above or below the diagnostic cutoff value. When a unilateral pressure measurement is within 5 mmHg above or below the cutoff value, a bilateral ICP measurement may be warranted.Level of Evidence:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.