scholarly journals Effects of aerobic exercise in the treatment of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a protocol of a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Naiane Teixeira Bastos de Oliveira ◽  
Irlei dos Santos ◽  
Gisela Cristiane Miyamoto ◽  
Cristina Maria Nunes Cabral

Abstract Background Chronic musculoskeletal pain affects the quality of life of older adults by interfering in their ability to perform activities of daily living. Aerobic exercise programs have been used in the treatment of various health conditions, including musculoskeletal disorders. However, there is still little evidence on the effects of aerobic exercise for the treatment of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess the effects of aerobic exercise in improving pain and function of older adults with chronic pain as a consequence of different chronic musculoskeletal conditions. Methods The databases to be used in the search are PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Randomized controlled trials that used aerobic exercise in the treatment of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain will be included. Primary outcomes will be pain and function. We will use the PEDro scale to evaluate the methodological quality and statistical description of each included study, and the strength of the recommendations will be summarized using GRADE. Discussion The results of this systematic review will provide a synthesis of the current evidence on the effects of aerobic exercise in the treatment of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain. In addition, this information can help health professionals in decision-making about the use of aerobic exercise in the treatment of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Ethics and dissemination This systematic review was recorded prospectively, and the results will be part of a doctoral thesis to be published in a peer-reviewed international journal and possibly presented at international conferences. Systematic review registration PROSPERO, CRD42019118903.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamila Shelry Gonçalves ◽  
Ana Carolina Queiroz Godoy Daniel ◽  
José Luiz Tatagiba Lamas ◽  
Henrique Ceretta Oliveira ◽  
Renata Cristina De Campos Pereira Silveira ◽  
...  

UNSTRUCTURED Introduction: Physiotherapy can include both device-guided slow breathing and device-guided slow breathing in the treatment of systemic arterial hypertension. Methods: A systematic search of all published randomized controlled trials on the effects of device-guided and non-device-guided slow breathing on hypertensive patients, without language restriction, will be carried out until January 2020 in nine databases: Pubmed / MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature ( CINAHL), Scopus, Web of Science, Livivo, as well as a search of clinical trial records databases, CT.GOV (Clinical trials.Gov), and bases for the Open Grey gray literature, Gray Literature Report, ProQuest Central (Citation, Abstract or Indexing and Dissertations and Theses). In all of these databases, potentially eligible studies including completed and ongoing ECAs were researched. The quality assessment of the included studies will be conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials. The overall quality of the evidence for each outcome will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Discussion: This systematic review will provide a summary of the current evidence on the effects of both device-guided slow breathing and device-guided slow breathing on blood pressure levels. This information can contribute to decision making by health professionals related to the use of these interventions in hypertensive patients. Following the guidelines, this systematic review protocol was registered with the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) number CRD42020147554.


2020 ◽  
pp. 026921552095193
Author(s):  
Alberto Saavedra-García ◽  
Jose A Moral-Munoz ◽  
David Lucena-Anton

Objective: To evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of simultaneous combination of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation in the recovery of upper limb motor function after stroke, compared with conventional therapy, mirror therapy or electrical stimulation isolated. Data sources: Articles published in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Central register of controlled trials and ScienceDirect up to July 2020. Review methods: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro tool. The RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to obtain the meta-analysis, through the standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and to evaluate the risk of bias. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: Eight articles were included in this systematic review, seven were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 314 participants were analyzed. The overall quality of the articles included in this review was good. There was no overall significant mean difference on upper limb motor function after stroke using the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment by 1.56 (95% CI = –2.08, 5.20; P = 0.40; moderate-certainty evidence) and the Box and Block Test results by 1.39 (95% CI = –2.14, 4.92; P = 0.44; high-certainty evidence). There was overall significant difference in the Action Research Arm Test by 3.54 (95% CI = 0.18, 6.90; P = 0.04; high-certainty evidence). Conclusion: Direct scientific evidence about the effectiveness of the combined therapy of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation simultaneously for the improvement of the upper limb motor function after stroke is lacking. Further high-quality and well-designed research is needed.


Neurosurgery ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 701-715 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Yavin ◽  
Steven Casha ◽  
Samuel Wiebe ◽  
Thomas E Feasby ◽  
Callie Clark ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND: Due to uncertain evidence, lumbar fusion for degenerative indications is associated with the greatest measured practice variation of any surgical procedure. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current evidence on the comparative safety and efficacy of lumbar fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care for degenerative indications. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to June 30, 2016). Comparative studies reporting validated measures of safety or efficacy were included. Treatment effects were calculated through DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 65 studies (19 randomized controlled trials, 16 prospective cohort studies, 15 retrospective cohort studies, and 15 registries) enrolling a total of 302 620 patients. Disability, pain, and patient satisfaction following fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care were dependent on surgical indications and study methodology. Relative to decompression-alone, the risk of reoperation following fusion was increased for spinal stenosis (relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.28) and decreased for spondylolisthesis (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83). Among patients with spinal stenosis, complications were more frequent following fusion (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.18-2.96). Mortality was not significantly associated with any treatment modality. CONCLUSION: Positive clinical change was greatest in patients undergoing fusion for spondylolisthesis while complications and the risk of reoperation limited the benefit of fusion for spinal stenosis. The relative safety and efficacy of fusion for chronic low back pain suggests careful patient selection is required (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews number, CRD42015020153).


Author(s):  
Durga Kulkarni ◽  
Sarah Gregory ◽  
Michelle Evans

Abstract Background Exercise has been known to preserve and enhance functional performance in older adults. Eccentric exercise involves muscle contractions characterised by unique features such as lengthening of the muscle–tendon complex by a greater opposing force. Aims To systematically review randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of eccentric exercises in reducing the incidence of falls and improving the functional performance in older adults. Key methods We conducted a systematic review of RCTs following the PRISMA-P guidelines. Searches were completed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL, Medline, and Global Health CABI. We included RCTs reporting at least one of the following outcomes—falls, Berg balance scale, timed-up and go test, chair stand test, stair climb test, maximal walking speed, and minute walking distance. Two reviewers screened papers for eligibility and assessed the quality of included papers using the Cochrane Collaborative risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials. Data were extracted by a single reviewer and cross-checked by the second reviewer. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, given the high level of heterogeneity across studies. Results Ten studies were assessed as eligible for inclusion in the review. Overall, eccentric exercises were as effective as conventional resistance exercises in improving the selected outcomes by most studies. Additionally, when pre-exercise and post-eccentric exercise functional performance measures were compared, there was a statistically significant improvement in nearly all measures. The quality of trials was mixed (one high, four moderate, two low–moderate, and three low risk of bias). Conclusions Our systematic review suggests that eccentric exercises can be as effective as conventional exercises in older adults. Evidence suggests that such exercise interventions can lead to an improvement in geriatric function.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (12) ◽  
pp. 1394-1415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Martinez-Calderon ◽  
Mar Flores-Cortes ◽  
Jose Miguel Morales-Asencio ◽  
Alejandro Luque-Suarez

Pain Medicine ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1316-1331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendon Stubbs ◽  
Tarik T. Binnekade ◽  
Andy Soundy ◽  
Pat Schofield ◽  
Ivan P. J. Huijnen ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 475.e1-475.e24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Z. Megale ◽  
Leticia A. Deveza ◽  
Fiona M. Blyth ◽  
Vasi Naganathan ◽  
Paulo H. Ferreira ◽  
...  

BJGP Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen20X101032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Pearce ◽  
Kate Jolly ◽  
Laura L Jones ◽  
Gemma Matthewman ◽  
Mandana Zanganeh ◽  
...  

BackgroundExercise is recommended as a treatment for premenstrual syndrome (PMS) in clinical guidelines, but this is currently based on poor-quality trial evidence.AimTo systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of exercise as a treatment for PMS.Design & settingThis systematic review searched eight major databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and two trial registries from inception until April 2019.MethodRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise interventions of a minimum of 8-weeks duration with non-exercise comparator groups in women with PMS were included. Mean change scores for any continuous PMS outcome measure were extracted from eligible trials and standardised mean differences (SMDs) were calculated where possible. Random-effects meta-analysis of the effect of exercise on global PMS symptoms was the primary outcome. Secondary analyses examined the effects of exercise on predetermined clusters of psychological, physical, and behavioural symptoms.ResultsA total of 436 non-duplicate returns were screened, with 15 RCTs eligible for inclusion (n = 717). Seven trials contributed data to the primary outcome meta-analysis (n = 265); participants randomised to an exercise intervention reported reduced global PMS symptom scores (SMD = -1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.88 to -0.29) versus comparator, but with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 87%). Secondary results for psychological (SMD = -1.67; 95% CI = -2.38 to -0.96), physical (SMD = -1.62; 95% CI = -2.41 to -0.83) and behavioural (SMD = -1.94; 95% CI = -2.45 to -1.44) symptom groupings displayed similar findings. Most trials (87%) were considered at high risk of bias.ConclusionBased on current evidence, exercise may be an effective treatment for PMS, but some uncertainty remains.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document