IJCS | Volume 32, Nº5, September/October 2019

488 Table 2 - Results of hemodynamic and respiratory response reported as mean and standard deviation Outcome Groups Overall effect NMES (n = 15) Control (n = 15) Rest 15 min 30 min 45 min 60 min 15 after p value* Rest 15 min 30 min 45 min 60 min 15 after p value* p value t HR 82.13 (10.87) 83.87 (12.70) 86.67 (19.57) 83.13 (11.53) 83.33 (12.50) 82.06 (11.34) 0.945 81.00 (14.81) 79.87 (5.58) 81.53 (13.80) 80.73 (13.68) 82.47 (12.82) 81.73 (13.90) 0.997 0,527 SBP 111.67 (14.43) 114.60 (14.97) 112.93 (13.34) 114.53 (12.78) 113.93 (12.86) 112.40 (12.91) 0.928 108.80 (17.79) 114.40 (18.16) 111.80 (15.94) 112.60 (17.93) 113.40 (16.83) 113.53 (18.07) 0.964 0,784 DBP 65.13 (14.34) 66.93 (12.81) 65.93 (13.39) 67.60 (13.13) 68.4 (13.65) 65.27 (13.05) 0.981 64.47 (10.78) 66.67 (11.08) 66.00 (10.14) 65.80 (10.24) 64.73 (7.91) 65.47 (9.08) 0.991 0,388 MBP 81.40 (12.98) 82.67 (10.87) 81.40 (11.49) 83.30 (10.12) 81.93 (10.46) 81.20 (9.27) 0.995 81.27 (12.76) 82.87 (11.34) 81.40 (11.63) 83.47 (10.62) 82.13 (10.23) 83.07 (10.40) 0.992 0,922 RR 24.33 (3.24) 23.60 (3.22) 22.60 (2.38) 23.00 (3.42) 22.93 (1.83) 23.40 (2.75) 0.634 23.40 (4.47) 23.93 (4.25) 22.67 (3.51) 23.20 (4.77) 24.33 (4.47) 24.13 (4.17) 0.896 0,089 SpO 2 97.13 (1.77) 96.87 (2.17) 96.87 (1.69) 96.80 (1.78) 96.93 (1.94) 97.07 (1.83) 0.996 96.40 (2.29) 96.47 (1.50) 96.40 (2.20) 97.13 (1.46) 96.87 (2.13) 97.47 (1.30) 0.511 0,322 NMES: Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation; HR: heart rate (beats/min); SBP: systolic blood pressure; (mmHg); DBP: diastolic blood pressure (mmHg); MBP: mean blood pressure (mmHg); RR: respiratory rate (breaths/min); SpO 2 : oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry (%); 15 after: 15 minutes after; *: p values in intra- group comparison; t- p values in intergroup comparison. ANOVA, p > 0.05. Cerqueira et al. NMES after cardiac surgery Int J Cardiovasc Sci. 2019;32(5):483-489 Original Article immediate postoperative period of patients submitted to cardiac surgery. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the staff of the Cardiology Service for their invaluable collaboration in this study and the members of the research group of LAPERF ( Laboratório de Pesquisa em Reintegração Funcional ). Author contributions Conception and design of the research: Cerqueira TCF, Cerqueira Neto ML, Cacau LAP, Carvalho VO, Mendonça JT, Araújo Filho AA, Mendonça JT, Santana Filho VJ. Acquisition of data: Cerqueira TCF, Carvalho AJG, Araújo Filho AA. Analysis and interpretation of the data: Cerqueira TCF, Cerqueira Neto ML, Cacau LAP, Carvalho VO, Mendonça JT, Oliveira GU, Mendonça JT, Santana Filho VJ. Statistical analysis: Cerqueira TCF, Oliveira GU. Obtaining financing: Cerqueira Neto ML. Writing of the manuscript: Cerqueira TCF, Cerqueira Neto ML, Carvalho VO, Carvalho AJG, Oliveira GU, Santana Filho VJ. Critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content: Cerqueira TCF, Cerqueira Neto ML, Cacau LAP, Carvalho VO, Mendonça JT, Carvalho AJG, Oliveira GU, Araújo Filho AA, Mendonça JT, Santana Filho VJ. Potential Conflict of Interest No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported. Sources of Funding This study was funded by FAPITEC – Sergipe e Universidade Federal de Sergipe . Study Association This article is part of the thesis of Doctoral submitted by Telma Cristina Fontes Cerqueira, from Universidade Federal de Sergipe . Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universidade Tiradentes (UNIT) under the protocol