scholarly journals The Effect of Therapeutic Exercise Interventions on Physical and Psychosocial Outcomes in Adults Aged 80 Years and Older: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author(s):  
Philippa J.A. Nicolson ◽  
Vicky Duong ◽  
Esther Williamson ◽  
Sally Hopewell ◽  
Sarah E. Lamb

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of therapeutic exercise on physical and psychosocial outcomes in community-dwelling adults aged 80 years or older. Databases were searched from inception to July 8, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were screened by two reviewers who extracted data and assessed study quality. Sixteen RCTs (1,660 participants) were included. Compared to nonexercise controls there was no evidence of an effect of exercise on performance based (standardized mean differences: 0.58, 95% confidence interval: [−0.19, 1.36]; I2: 89%; six RCTs; 290 participants; very low-quality evidence) or self-reported physical function (standardized mean differences: 1.35, 95% confidence interval: [−0.78, 3.48]; I2: 96%; three RCTs; 280 participants; very low-quality evidence) at short-medium term follow-up. Four RCTs reporting psychosocial outcomes could not be combined in meta-analysis and reported varying results. Exercise appeared to reduce the risk of mortality during follow-up (risk ratio: 0.47, 95% confidence interval: [0.32, 0.70]; I2: 0.0%; six RCTs; 1,222 participants; low-quality evidence).

Author(s):  
Sansano-Nadal ◽  
Giné-Garriga ◽  
Brach ◽  
Wert ◽  
Jerez-Roig ◽  
...  

Exercise is a form of physical activity (PA). PA is an important marker of health and quality of life in older adults. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess the effect of exercise-based interventions on an at least six-month follow up PA measure, and to describe the specific strategies implemented during the intervention to strengthen the sustainability of PA in community-dwelling 65+ year-old adults. We registered and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42017070892) of randomized clinical trials (RCT). We searched three electronic databases during January 2018 to identify RCT assessing any type of exercise-based intervention. Studies had to report a pre-, post-, and at least 6-month post-intervention follow-up. To be included, at least one PA outcome had to be assessed. The effect of exercise-based interventions was assessed compared to active (e.g., a low-intensity type of exercise, such as stretching or toning activities) and non-active (e.g., usual care) control interventions at several time points. Secondary analyses were conducted, restricted to studies that reported specific strategies to enhance the sustainability of PA. The intervention effect was measured on self-reported and objective measures of time spent in PA, by means of standardized mean differences. Standardized mean differences of PA level were pooled. Pooled estimates of effect were computed with the DerSimonian–Laird method, applying a random effects model. The risk of bias was also assessed. We included 12 studies, comparing 18 exercise intervention groups to four active and nine non-active control groups. Nine studies reported specific strategies to enhance the long-term sustainability of PA. The strategies were mostly related to the self-efficacy, self-control, and behavior capability principles based on the social cognitive theory. Exercise interventions compared to active control showed inconclusive and heterogeneous results. When compared to non-active control, exercise interventions improved PA time at the six-months follow up (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.30; 95%CI 0.15 to 0.44; four studies; 724 participants; I2 0%), but not at the one- or two-years follow-ups. No data were available on the mid- and long-term effect of adding strategies to enhance the sustainability of PA. Exercise interventions have small clinical benefits on PA levels in community-dwelling older adults, with a decline in the observed improvement after six months of the intervention cessation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552199095
Author(s):  
Danilo Harudy Kamonseki ◽  
Letícia Bojikian Calixtre ◽  
Rodrigo Py Gonçalves Barreto ◽  
Paula Rezende Camargo

Objective: To systematically review the effectiveness of electromyographic biofeedback interventions to improve pain and function of patients with shoulder pain. Design: Systematic review of controlled clinical trials. Literature search: Databases (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and SCOPUS) were searched in December 2020. Study selection criteria: Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effects of electromyographic biofeedback for individuals with shoulder pain. Patient-reported pain and functional outcomes were collected and synthesized. Data synthesis: The level of evidence was synthesized using GRADE and Standardized Mean Differences and 95% confidence interval were calculated using a random-effects inverse variance model for meta-analysis. Results: Five studies were included with a total sample of 272 individuals with shoulder pain. Very-low quality of evidence indicated that electromyographic biofeedback was not superior to control for reducing shoulder pain (standardized mean differences = −0.21, 95% confidence interval: −0.67 to 0.24, P = 0.36). Very-low quality of evidence indicated that electromyographic biofeedback interventions were not superior to control for improving shoulder function (standardized mean differences = −0.11, 95% confidence interval: −0.41 to 0.19, P = 0.48). Conclusion: Electromyographic biofeedback may be not effective for improving shoulder pain and function. However, the limited number of included studies and very low quality of evidence does not support a definitive recommendation about the effectiveness of electromyographic biofeedback to treat individuals with shoulder pain.


Gerontology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jane Xu ◽  
Ching S. Wan ◽  
Kiriakos Ktoris ◽  
Esmee M. Reijnierse ◽  
Andrea B. Maier

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Sarcopenia can predispose individuals to falls, fractures, hospitalization, and mortality. The prevalence of sarcopenia depends on the population studied and the definition used for the diagnosis. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between sarcopenia and mortality and if it is dependent on the population and sarcopenia definition. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane from 1 January 2010 to 6 April 2020 for articles relating to sarcopenia and mortality. Articles were included if they met the following criteria – cohorts with a mean or median age ≥18 years and either of the following sarcopenia definitions: Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS and AWGS2019), European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP and EWGSOP2), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), International Working Group for Sarcopenia (IWGS), or Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC). Hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) were pooled separately in meta-analyses using a random-effects model, stratified by population (community-dwelling adults, outpatients, inpatients, and nursing home residents). Subgroup analyses were performed for sarcopenia definition and follow-up period. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Out of 3,025 articles, 57 articles were included in the systematic review and 56 in the meta-analysis (42,108 participants, mean age of 49.4 ± 11.7 to 86.6 ± 1.0 years, 40.3% females). Overall, sarcopenia was associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality (HR: 2.00 [95% CI: 1.71, 2.34]; OR: 2.35 [95% CI: 1.64, 3.37]), which was independent of population, sarcopenia definition, and follow-up period in subgroup analyses. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Sarcopenia is associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality, independent of population and sarcopenia definition, which highlights the need for screening and early diagnosis in all populations.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
M. R. Ismail ◽  
J. A. Seabrook ◽  
J. A. Gilliland

Abstract Objective: Fruit and vegetables (FVs) distribution interventions have been implemented as a public health strategy to increase children’s intake of FVs at school settings. The purpose of this review was to examine whether snack-based FVs distribution interventions can improve school-aged children’s consumption of FVs. Design: Systematic Review and meta-analysis of articles published in English, in a peer-review journals were identified by searching six databases up to August 2020. Standardized Mean Differences (SMDs) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was quantified using I2 statistics. Setting: Population-based studies of interventions where the main focus was the effectiveness of distributed FVs as snacks to schoolchildren in North America, Europe and Pacific were included. Results: Forty-seven studies, reporting on 15 different interventions, were identified; 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. All interventions were effective in increasing children’s consumption of FVs, with only one intervention demonstrating a null effect. Pooled results under all classifications showed effectiveness in improving children’s consumption of FVs, particularly for multi-component interventions at post-intervention (SMD 0.20, CI 0.13, 0.27) and free distribution interventions at follow-up (SMD 0.19, CI 0.12, 0.27). Conclusions: Findings suggest that utilizing FV distribution interventions provide a promising avenue by which children’s consumption can be improved. Nonetheless, our results are based on a limited number of studies, and further studies should be performed to confirm these results. More consistent measurement protocols in terms of rigorous study methodologies, intervention duration, and follow-up evaluation are needed to improve comparability across studies.


Author(s):  
Senaka Rajapakse ◽  
Nipun Lakshitha de Silva ◽  
Praveen Weeratunga ◽  
Chaturaka Rodrigo ◽  
Chathurani Sigera ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Carica papaya (CP) extract is becoming popular as an unlicensed herbal remedy purported to hasten recovery in dengue infection, mostly based on observations that it may increase platelet counts. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to critically analyze the evidence from controlled clinical trials on the efficacy and safety of CP extract in the treatment of dengue infection. Methods PubMed, LILACS and Google Scholar were searched for randomized or non-randomized trials enrolling patients with suspected or confirmed dengue where CP extract was compared, as a treatment measure, against standard treatment. Recovery of platelet counts as well as other clinical indicators of favourable outcome (duration of hospital stay, prevention of plasma leakage, life threatening complications, and mortality) were assessed. Results Nine studies (India-6, Pakistan-1, Indonesia-1, Malaysia-1) met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies showed an increase in platelet counts in patients receiving CP extract, while one study showed no significant difference between the two groups, and direct comparison was not possible in the remaining study. Serious adverse events were not reported. CP extract may reduce the duration of hospital stay (mean difference − 1.98 days, 95% confidence interval − 1.83 to − 2.12, 3 studies, 580 participants, low quality evidence), and cause improvement in mean platelet counts between the first and fifth day of treatment (mean difference 35.45, 95% confidence interval 23.74 to 47.15, 3 studies, 129 participants, low quality evidence). No evidence was available regarding other clinical outcomes. Conclusions The clinical value of improvement in platelet count or early discharge is unclear in the absence of more robust indicators of favourable clinical outcome. Current evidence is insufficient to comment on the role of CP extract in dengue. There is a need for further well designed clinical trials examining the effect of CP on platelet counts, plasma leakage, other serious manifestations of dengue, and mortality, with clearly defined outcome measures.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e029826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Yan ◽  
Xinyu Wu ◽  
Meiying Su ◽  
Fang Hua ◽  
Bin Shi

ObjectivesTo compare the use of short implants (≤6 mm) in atrophic posterior maxilla versus longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data sourcesElectronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane CENTRAL. Retrospective and prospective hand searches were also performed.Eligibility criteriaRCTs comparing short implants (≤6 mm) and longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), marginal bone loss (MBL), complications and patient satisfaction.Data extraction and synthesisRisks of bias in and across studies were evaluated. Meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were undertaken. Quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.ResultsA total of seven RCTs involving 310 participants were included. No significant difference in survival rate was found for 1–3 years follow-up (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.74, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence) or for 3 years or longer follow-up (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.79, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, short implants (≤6 mm) showed significantly less MBL in 1–3 years follow-up (MD=−0.13 mm, 95% CI −0.21 to 0.05; p=0.001, I²=87%, low-quality evidence) and in 3 years or longer follow-up (MD=−0.25 mm, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.10; p=0.001, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). In addition, short implant (≤6 mm) resulted in fewer postsurgery reaction (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.31, p<0.001, I²=40%, moderate-quality evidence) and sinus perforation or infection (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.63, p=0.01, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence).ConclusionsFor atrophic posterior maxilla, short implants (≤6 mm) are a promising alternative to sinus floor elevation, with comparable survival rate, less MBL and postsurgery reactions. Additional high-quality studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of short implants (≤6 mm).Trial registeration numberThe protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD42018103531).


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e031200
Author(s):  
Meghan Ambrens ◽  
Anne Tiedemann ◽  
Kim Delbaere ◽  
Stephanie Alley ◽  
Corneel Vandelanotte

IntroductionBetween 20% and 28% of community-dwelling older people experience a fall each year. Falls can result in significant personal and socioeconomic costs, and are the leading cause of admission to hospital for an older person in Australia. Exercise interventions that target balance are the most effective for preventing falls in community-dwellers; however, greater accessibility of effective programmes is needed. As technology has become more accessible, its use as a tool for supporting and promoting health and well-being of individuals has been explored. Little is known about the effectiveness of eHealth technologies to deliver fall prevention interventions. This protocol describes a systematic review with meta-analysis that aims to evaluate the effect of eHealth fall prevention interventions compared with usual care control on balance in people aged 65 years and older living in the community.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic search of the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Embase and PsychINFO and citation search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed Central, Cochrane Database Central and PEDro for randomised controlled trials that use an eHealth technology to deliver a fall prevention intervention to community-dwellers aged ≥65 years, that are published in English, and include a balance outcome (primary outcome). The screening and selection of articles for review will be undertaken by two independent reviewers. The PEDro scale and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations will be used to assess study quality. The results will be synthesised descriptively, and if sufficient data are available and the studies are not overly heterogeneous, a meta-analysis will be conducted using the random effects model.Ethics and disseminationAs this will be a systematic review, without involvement of human participants, there will be no requirement for ethical approval. The results of this systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and dissemination to policymakers and consumers to maximise health impact.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018115098.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Ronald Chow ◽  
David Hui ◽  
Saverio Caini ◽  
Charles B. Simone ◽  
Elizabeth Prsic ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Cancer-related dyspnea is a common symptom in patients with cancer. It has also been reported to be a predictor of poorer prognosis, which can then change clinical treatment and advance care planning. Currently, no definitive recommendation for pharmacologic agents for cancer-related dyspnea exists. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to compare pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-related dyspnea. Methods A search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL through May 2021. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), as reported by studies or calculated from baseline and follow-up dyspnea scores, were amalgamated into a summary SMD and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a restricted maximum likelihood multivariate network meta-analysis. Results Twelve studies were included in this review; six reported on prophylaxis of exertional dyspnea, five on treatment of everyday dyspnea, and one on treatment of episodic dyspnea. Morphine sulfate was better at controlling everyday dyspnea than placebo (SMD 1.210; 95% CI: 0.415–2.005). Heterogeneity in study design and comparisons, however, led to some concerns with the underlying consistency assumption in network meta-analysis design. Conclusion Optimal pharmacologic interventions for cancer-related dyspnea could not be determined based on this analysis. Further trials are needed to report on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for the prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-related dyspnea.


2021 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2021-104861
Author(s):  
Britt Elin Øiestad ◽  
Carsten B Juhl ◽  
Adam G Culvenor ◽  
Bjørnar Berg ◽  
Jonas Bloch Thorlund

ObjectiveTo update a systematic review on the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and the risk of incident knee osteoarthritis in women and men.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesSystematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, AMED and CENTRAL in May 2021.Eligible criteria for selecting studiesLongitudinal studies with at least 2 years follow-up including baseline measure of knee extensor muscle strength, and follow-up measure of symptomatic or radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Studies including participants with known knee osteoarthritis at baseline were excluded. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using six criteria for study validity and bias. Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation assessed overall quality of evidence. Meta-analysis estimated the OR for the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and incident knee osteoarthritis.ResultsWe included 11 studies with 46 819 participants. Low quality evidence indicated that knee extensor muscle weakness increased the odds of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in women (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.64) and in adult men (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.78), and for radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women: OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.71) and in men: OR 1.39 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.82). No associations were identified for knee injured populations except for radiographic osteoarthritis in men.DiscussionThere is low quality evidence that knee extensor muscle weakness is associated with incident symptomatic and radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women and men. Optimising knee extensor muscle strength may help to prevent knee osteoarthritis.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020214976.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document