Lolinda
J'aime nager dans le froid style Wim Hof.. 🏊♀️🙃
- Messages
- 432
The problem with the paper you have found is that it does not feature at all the NASA test. Patients are not required to reduce water and salt intake for 2 days. also they do not lean against the wall but stand. Free standing activates the muscles more. The smartness of the NASA test is to exclude these things that help POTS people to avoid the increase of heart rate.Is this it? https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-...arison-of-tilt-testing-compared-with-standing
Edit: I just noticed the date on the one I posted so I don't think it is the right one. I'm sorry.
Here might be a longer version but confusing how they keep putting boxes with different topics down the whole page. It made me think it was just the shortened version.
And still only 2012: https://www.researchgate.net/public..._testing_compared_with_standing_haemodynamics
having said that, IMO The wisest thing is to think about what your purpose with testing is:
- if you want to file for disability then do the test as tough as you can. I guess for this purpose probably the best would be: reduce water and salt intake as in the NASA test for 2 days. Get a doctor to do for you until the table test for a long duration and don't tell him that you are water and salt deprived. This should be the toughest test possible and get you the money
- if wanting to know whether your life is affected by POTS, then I would do the test as a real world-like as possible, that is, no tilt table but plain simple standing, for as long as it is relevant for your life. Here the paper you found is useful as it specifies a heart rate difference of 29 for 10 min standing and a heart rate difference of 34 for 30 minutes standing. The paper is useful in my opinion because it helps finding good cut-off values.
Last edited: