COVID 19ECC-4-COVIDNCT06895850
Eccentric Cycling Vs. Standard Rehabilitation for Post-ICU Recovery in COVID-19 Survivors
A study testing Eccentric cycling training and Standar Rehabilitation in people with COVID 19, run by Universidad Nacional Andres Bello at 1 site in Chile.
Trial summary
We performed a longitudinal crossover clinical study on survivors of COVID-19. We compared a standard rehabilitation protocol using elastic bands versus a novel eccentric cycling training protocol in individuals who have been discharged after being hospitalized due to COVID-19. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- COVID 19
- What is being tested?
- Eccentric cycling training and Standar Rehabilitation
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChile
- Study dates
- 30 Oct 2021to 30 Jul 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Participants were hospital-discharged at least 6 months before the start of the study and had not undergone rehabilitation after hospital discharge.
Who cannot join
- Patients who did not pass the medical check-up before the study (patients with myocarditis and/or abnormal troponins or electrocardiograms from the last three months), oxygen-dependent patients, those with musculoskeletal injuries, bedridden patients, disoriented patients, or those with severe mental disabilities were excluded due to being unsafe to exercise.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
We performed a longitudinal crossover clinical study on survivors of COVID-19. We compared a standard rehabilitation protocol using elastic bands versus a novel eccentric cycling training protocol in individuals who have been discharged after being hospitalized due to COVID-19. We assessed the effects of these two rehabilitation modalities on physical performance, quality of life, and cognitive function parameters. We found that both protocols induced significant improvements in all variables. However, eccentric cycling induced such improvements involving less time per session. These findings could significantly impact strategies to treat COVID-19 survivors, which is a novel and impactful contribution to the body of knowledge.
Read the detailed description
Twenty patients (9 men, 11 women) between the ages of 30 and 60 years who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 in an ICU volunteered for this study. Participants were hospital-discharged at least 6 months before the start of the study and had not undergone rehabilitation after hospital discharge.
This study utilized a two-treatment crossover design. Each treatment was eight weeks in duration, with a two-week washout period. The order of treatments was randomized and counterbalanced. Twenty participants were recruited and completed this study. This sample was deemed sufficient as an a-priori power analysis (G*Power 3.1.9, Germany) estimated that 18 patients were required to test the anticipated effect, considering a statistical power of 0.8 and alpha <0.05. This effect was estimated based on the 18.7% increase in the 6-minute walking test observed after 12 weeks of eccentric training [10]. Considering a 10% dropout, we recruited 20 participants for this study.
Condition order was randomly arranged as either ECC then STD REHAB (n=10) or STD REHAB then ECC (n=10) to account for a potential order effect of treatments. Both interventions lasted eight weeks, and assessments were performed before and after the interventions. As shown in Fig. 1A, during the ECC participant performed eccentric cycling using an arm-and-leg motorized cycle ergometer (Model ABJ-107-2, Medical Technology Co LTD, China) while during the STD REHAB condition participants performed functional rehabilitation using strengthening exercises with elastic bands (Fig. 1B). During the 2-week wash-out period, the participants refrained from training in preparation for their second intervention.
2.3 Interventions The exercise intensity was matched between conditions throughout the intervention period using the 6-20 point rating of perceived exertion (RPE; Borg´s Scale) [10]. For both groups, RPE progressively increased during the first two weeks from 9 (very light) to 11 (fairly light), and then over the next five weeks from 13 (somewhat hard) to 15 (hard). Additionally, heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (Omron Serie 5/7156, USA), and oxygen saturation (Heal Force A3, CHOICEMMED, China) were measured immediately after all training sessions to quantify the cardiovascular demands of training, which were averaged between training sessions.
The training protocol for the ECC consisted of a 5-minute warm-up on a stationary ergometer (RS1 Go, Life fitness, USA) before completion of the prescribed workout. In the first two weeks, participants completed two sets of 10 minutes of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 9-11 with 2 minutes of inter-set rest. Then, during weeks 3-8, participants completed two sets of 15 min of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 13-15 with 2 min inter-set rest.
The training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session.
- Conditions
- COVID 19
- Being tested
- Eccentric cycling training, Standar Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- rehabilitation, hospitalization, eccentric cycling
- Medical subject headings
- COVID-19
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Eccentric cycling trainingOther
The training protocol for the ECC consisted of a 5-minute warm-up on a stationary ergometer (RS1 Go, Life fitness, USA) before completion of the prescribed workout. In the first two weeks, participants completed two sets of 10 minutes of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 9-11 with 2 minutes of inter-set rest. Then, during weeks 3-8, participants completed two sets of 15 min of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 13-15 with 2 min inter-set rest.
Standar RehabilitationOther
The training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Participants performed the eccentric cycling training for 8 weeks (experimental group) Receives: Other: Eccentric cycling training |
| Standard Rehabilitation | Active comparator | The training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session. Receives: Other: Standar Rehabilitation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Muscle Strength (Medical Research Council; MRC)
Manual strength of six muscle groups (shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, wrist extension, hip flexion, knee extension, and ankle dorsiflexion) was evaluated bilaterally following the MRC scale guidelines [17]. Each muscle group was rated on a scale from 0 (paralysis) to 5 (normal strength). The MRC-sum score evaluates global muscle strength. The final score ranges from 0 (total paralysis) to 60 (normal muscle strength in all four limbs) [17].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Handgrip Strength
Manual handgrip strength was evaluated with a hand dynamometer (Jamar, USA) with the participant, seated with the elbow at 90°, performing a maximum grip for 3 seconds, expressed in kilograms. Three attempts were made for the dominant upper limb, with a one-minute rest between attempts, and the highest of the three values was registered [18].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
The 6MWT measured the distance a person could walk in 6 minutes as quickly as possible [10]. It was conducted in a 30 m long corridor. If the participant experienced chest pain, dyspnoea, sweating, cyanosis, or chest discomfort during the test, the test was stopped, and the distance covered until the onset of symptoms was recorded.
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
One-Minute Sit-to-Stand Test
The participants were asked to cross their arms with hands on the opposite shoulders and to sit and stand from the chair as many times as possible in one minute [19]. This test serves as an estimate of lower extremity power and functional capacity [19].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Timed up and go (TUG)
Participants were instructed to rise from a chair, walk three meters, turn around a cone, walk back to the chair, and sit down with their back leaning against the backrest as quickly and safely as possible [10]. The time in seconds (s) needed to perform the entire sequence was recorded. Each participant performed the TUG in three attempts with a 2-minute rest between attempts, and the fastest time was used for further analyses.
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Body Composition
Anthropometric measurements were taken between 8 and 10 am after an overnight fast, including weight (kg) and height (cm). Furthermore, multifrequency bioimpedanciometry (InBody 120, InBody Co., Ltd, Republic of Korea) was used to determine the whole-body fat and muscle mass percentage [15] before and after interventions.
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Peak Expiratory Flow
Pulmonary function was assessed with a mini-Wright peak flow meter (Clement Clarke, Mini-Wright PFM, United Kingdom) by measuring the maximum expiratory flow maintained for 10 milliseconds, expressed in L/min. This test was performed with the participant seated with their knees and hips flexed at 90°. In this position, participants performed a maximum inspiration, placed the device's mouthpiece in their mouth and sealed it with their lips and their nose clipped, and then was asked to breathe out as forcefully and quickly as possible. This manoeuvre was repeated thrice with a 2 min rest between each attempt, and the highest value achieved was recorded [16].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale (PCFS)
The PCFS is a validated questionnaire to assess the functionality of COVID-19 survivors upon hospital discharge [20]. It consists of an interview with questions about daily living activities, instrumental activities, social activities, and lifestyle that the patient must rate from 0 (no limitations) to 4 (severe functional limitation).
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
The MoCA test assesses cognitive function and takes approximately 10 minutes [22]. The MoCA evaluates orientation, short-term memory, visuospatial and executive functioning, language skills, abstraction, animal naming, and attention aspects through a guided questionnaire. The total score is a maximum of 30 points, with an additional point added if the person has no schooling. Scores below 26 points indicate cognitive dysfunction [22].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Barthel Index
This instrument is widely used to assess a person's ability to perform basic activities of daily living, providing a quantitative estimate of the degree of dependence. Patients scored their capacity to perform ten activities encompassing personal hygiene, eating, and moving around the home. Each activity was scored from 0 to 5, with 0 being unable to do it and five being completely independent in performing the task. All items were summed, with scores of 0-20 classified as total dependence, 21-60 as severe dependence, 61-90 as moderate dependence, 91-99 as slight dependence, and 100 as completely independent [23].
Measured: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Mar 2025
- Study start30 Oct 2021
- Primary completion30 Jul 2022
- Study completion30 Jul 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for COVID 19Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- This study utilized a two-treatment crossover design. Each treatment was eight weeks in duration, with a two-week washout period. The order of treatments was randomized and counterbalanced.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad Nacional Andres Bello
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Luis Penailillo, Universidad Nacional Andres Bello
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06895850
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1
- Acronym
- ECC-4-COVID
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 20 Mar 2025
- Last updated
- 26 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Inostroza M, Valdes O, Tapia G, Nunez O, Kompen MJ, Nosaka K, Penailillo L. Effects of eccentric vs concentric cycling training on patients with moderate COPD. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2022 Feb;122(2):489-502. doi: 10.1007/s00421-021-04850-x. Epub 2021 Nov 20.
PubMed 34799753
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Eccentric Cycling Vs. Standard Rehabilitation for Post-ICU Recovery in COVID-19 Survivors
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06895850
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ECC-4-COVID / 1
- Conditions
- COVID 19
- Keywords
- rehabilitation, hospitalization, eccentric cycling
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad Nacional Andres BelloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 30 Oct 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jul 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Mar 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
We performed a longitudinal crossover clinical study on survivors of COVID-19. We compared a standard rehabilitation protocol using elastic bands versus a novel eccentric cycling training protocol in individuals who have been discharged after being hospitalized due to COVID-19. We assessed the effects of these two rehabilitation modalities on physical performance, quality of life, and cognitive function parameters. We found that both protocols induced significant improvements in all variables. However, eccentric cycling induced such improvements involving less time per session. These findings could significantly impact strategies to treat COVID-19 survivors, which is a novel and impactful contribution to the body of knowledge.
Detailed description
Twenty patients (9 men, 11 women) between the ages of 30 and 60 years who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 in an ICU volunteered for this study. Participants were hospital-discharged at least 6 months before the start of the study and had not undergone rehabilitation after hospital discharge.
This study utilized a two-treatment crossover design. Each treatment was eight weeks in duration, with a two-week washout period. The order of treatments was randomized and counterbalanced. Twenty participants were recruited and completed this study. This sample was deemed sufficient as an a-priori power analysis (G*Power 3.1.9, Germany) estimated that 18 patients were required to test the anticipated effect, considering a statistical power of 0.8 and alpha <0.05. This effect was estimated based on the 18.7% increase in the 6-minute walking test observed after 12 weeks of eccentric training [10]. Considering a 10% dropout, we recruited 20 participants for this study.
Condition order was randomly arranged as either ECC then STD REHAB (n=10) or STD REHAB then ECC (n=10) to account for a potential order effect of treatments. Both interventions lasted eight weeks, and assessments were performed before and after the interventions. As shown in Fig. 1A, during the ECC participant performed eccentric cycling using an arm-and-leg motorized cycle ergometer (Model ABJ-107-2, Medical Technology Co LTD, China) while during the STD REHAB condition participants performed functional rehabilitation using strengthening exercises with elastic bands (Fig. 1B). During the 2-week wash-out period, the participants refrained from training in preparation for their second intervention.
2.3 Interventions The exercise intensity was matched between conditions throughout the intervention period using the 6-20 point rating of perceived exertion (RPE; Borg´s Scale) [10]. For both groups, RPE progressively increased during the first two weeks from 9 (very light) to 11 (fairly light), and then over the next five weeks from 13 (somewhat hard) to 15 (hard). Additionally, heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (Omron Serie 5/7156, USA), and oxygen saturation (Heal Force A3, CHOICEMMED, China) were measured immediately after all training sessions to quantify the cardiovascular demands of training, which were averaged between training sessions.
The training protocol for the ECC consisted of a 5-minute warm-up on a stationary ergometer (RS1 Go, Life fitness, USA) before completion of the prescribed workout. In the first two weeks, participants completed two sets of 10 minutes of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 9-11 with 2 minutes of inter-set rest. Then, during weeks 3-8, participants completed two sets of 15 min of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 13-15 with 2 min inter-set rest.
The training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study utilized a two-treatment crossover design. Each treatment was eight weeks in duration, with a two-week washout period. The order of treatments was randomized and counterbalanced.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Other: Eccentric cycling trainingParticipants performed the eccentric cycling training for 8 weeks (experimental group) |
| Standard Rehabilitation | Active comparator | Other: Standar RehabilitationThe training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Participants were hospital-discharged at least 6 months before the start of the study and had not undergone rehabilitation after hospital discharge.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients who did not pass the medical check-up before the study (patients with myocarditis and/or abnormal troponins or electrocardiograms from the last three months), oxygen-dependent patients, those with musculoskeletal injuries, bedridden patients, disoriented patients, or those with severe mental disabilities were excluded due to being unsafe to exercise.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Eccentric cycling trainingThe training protocol for the ECC consisted of a 5-minute warm-up on a stationary ergometer (RS1 Go, Life fitness, USA) before completion of the prescribed workout. In the first two weeks, participants completed two sets of 10 minutes of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 9-11 with 2 minutes of inter-set rest. Then, during weeks 3-8, participants completed two sets of 15 min of eccentric cycling at an RPE between 13-15 with 2 min inter-set rest. | Other | Intervention |
| Standar RehabilitationThe training protocol for STD REHAB consisted of the same 5 min warm-up protocol used in ECC, followed by three sets of 8 repetitions of bicep curls, triceps extensions, shoulder abduction, bodyweight squats, deadlifts, and leg abductions with an elastic band with 2 min inter-set rest. The resistance of the elastic band tension was progressively increased according to the participant's tolerance based on RPE. ECC training was programmed for ~20-30 min, while STD REHAB lasted ~60 min per session. | Other | Standard Rehabilitation |
Primary outcome
Muscle Strength (Medical Research Council; MRC)
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Manual strength of six muscle groups (shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, wrist extension, hip flexion, knee extension, and ankle dorsiflexion) was evaluated bilaterally following the MRC scale guidelines [17]. Each muscle group was rated on a scale from 0 (paralysis) to 5 (normal strength). The MRC-sum score evaluates global muscle strength. The final score ranges from 0 (total paralysis) to 60 (normal muscle strength in all four limbs) [17].
Handgrip Strength
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Manual handgrip strength was evaluated with a hand dynamometer (Jamar, USA) with the participant, seated with the elbow at 90°, performing a maximum grip for 3 seconds, expressed in kilograms. Three attempts were made for the dominant upper limb, with a one-minute rest between attempts, and the highest of the three values was registered [18].
Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
The 6MWT measured the distance a person could walk in 6 minutes as quickly as possible [10]. It was conducted in a 30 m long corridor. If the participant experienced chest pain, dyspnoea, sweating, cyanosis, or chest discomfort during the test, the test was stopped, and the distance covered until the onset of symptoms was recorded.
One-Minute Sit-to-Stand Test
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
The participants were asked to cross their arms with hands on the opposite shoulders and to sit and stand from the chair as many times as possible in one minute [19]. This test serves as an estimate of lower extremity power and functional capacity [19].
Timed up and go (TUG)
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Participants were instructed to rise from a chair, walk three meters, turn around a cone, walk back to the chair, and sit down with their back leaning against the backrest as quickly and safely as possible [10]. The time in seconds (s) needed to perform the entire sequence was recorded. Each participant performed the TUG in three attempts with a 2-minute rest between attempts, and the fastest time was used for further analyses.
5 secondary outcomes
Body Composition
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Peak Expiratory Flow
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale (PCFS)
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Barthel Index
Time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Mar 2025.
- Background: PubMed 34799753Inostroza M, Valdes O, Tapia G, Nunez O, Kompen MJ, Nosaka K, Penailillo L. Effects of eccentric vs concentric cycling training on patients with moderate COPD. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2022 Feb;122(2):489-502. doi: 10.1007/s00421-021-04850-x. Epub 2021 Nov 20.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for COVID 19
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Safety, Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity Trial of RVX-sCPD9 Booster Intranasal COVID-19 Vaccine
COVID -19
RecruitingObservational study
Natural History of Post-Coronavirus Disease 19 Convalescence at the National Institutes of Health
Post-Coronavirus Disease 19
RecruitingPhase 4
Comparative Immunogenicity of Respiratory Virus Vaccines (CIRV2) Study
COVID -19, COVID - 19
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Dapagliflozin for Long COVID Syndrome
COVID - 19, Long COVID Syndrome
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Study of VYD2311 for the Treatment of Adults With Long-COVID or Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Long COVID, COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 Infection)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Eccentric cycling training and Standar Rehabilitation in people with COVID 19, run by Universidad Nacional Andres Bello at 1 site in Chile.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Chile. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Muscle Strength (Medical Research Council; MRC) (time frame: Baseline, Pre- intervention (Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups) and 8 week after interventions (post- Eccentric cycling and Standard rehabilitation groups)). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06895850, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Mar 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.