34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Physical fitness training for stroke patients

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Levels of physical activity and physical fitness are low after stroke. Interventions to increase physical fitness could reduce mortality and reduce disability through increased function. The primary objectives of this updated review were to determine whether fitness training after stroke reduces death, death or dependence, and disability. The secondary objectives were to determine the effects of training on adverse events, risk factors, physical fitness, mobility, physical function, health status and quality of life, mood, and cognitive function. In July 2018 we searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and four additional databases. We also searched ongoing trials registers and conference proceedings, screened reference lists, and contacted experts in the field. Randomised trials comparing either cardiorespiratory training or resistance training, or both (mixed training), with usual care, no intervention, or a non‐exercise intervention in stroke survivors. Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. We analysed data using random‐effects meta‐analyses and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Diverse outcome measures limited the intended analyses. We included 75 studies, involving 3017 mostly ambulatory participants, which comprised cardiorespiratory (32 studies, 1631 participants), resistance (20 studies, 779 participants), and mixed training interventions (23 studies, 1207 participants). Death was not influenced by any intervention; risk differences were all 0.00 (low‐certainty evidence). There were few deaths overall (19/3017 at end of intervention and 19/1469 at end of follow‐up). None of the studies assessed death or dependence as a composite outcome. Disability scores were improved at end of intervention by cardiorespiratory training (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.52, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.84; 8 studies, 462 participants; P = 0.002; moderate‐certainty evidence) and mixed training (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.42; 9 studies, 604 participants; P = 0.02; low‐certainty evidence). There were too few data to assess the effects of resistance training on disability. Secondary outcomes showed multiple benefits for physical fitness (VO 2 peak and strength), mobility (walking speed) and physical function (balance). These physical effects tended to be intervention‐specific with the evidence mostly low or moderate certainty. Risk factor data were limited or showed no effects apart from cardiorespiratory fitness (VO 2 peak), which increased after cardiorespiratory training (mean difference (MD) 3.40 mL/kg/min, 95% CI 2.98 to 3.83; 9 studies, 438 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of any serious adverse events. Lack of data prevents conclusions about effects of training on mood, quality of life, and cognition. Lack of data also meant benefits at follow‐up (i.e. after training had stopped) were unclear but some mobility benefits did persist. Risk of bias varied across studies but imbalanced amounts of exposure in control and intervention groups was a common issue affecting many comparisons. Few deaths overall suggest exercise is a safe intervention but means we cannot determine whether exercise reduces mortality or the chance of death or dependency. Cardiorespiratory training and, to a lesser extent mixed training, reduce disability during or after usual stroke care; this could be mediated by improved mobility and balance. There is sufficient evidence to incorporate cardiorespiratory and mixed training, involving walking, within post‐stroke rehabilitation programmes to improve fitness, balance and the speed and capacity of walking. The magnitude of VO 2 peak increase after cardiorespiratory training has been suggested to reduce risk of stroke hospitalisation by ˜7%. Cognitive function is under‐investigated despite being a key outcome of interest for patients. Further well‐designed randomised trials are needed to determine the optimal exercise prescription, the range of benefits and any long‐term benefits. Physical fitness training for stroke survivors Review question 
 We reviewed the evidence that examines whether physical fitness training is beneficial for health and function in people who have had a stroke. Background 
 Physical fitness is important to allow people to carry out everyday activities such as walking and climbing stairs. Physical fitness varies among everyone. For example, fitness in men tends to be a little higher than in women and everyone's fitness declines as we get older and if we become less physically active. In particular, in stroke survivors' physical fitness is often low. This may limit their ability to perform everyday activities and also worsen stroke‐related disability. For this reason fitness training has been proposed as a beneficial approach for people with stroke. However, taking part in fitness training could have a range of other benefits important to people with stroke such as improving cognitive function (thinking skills), improving mood, and quality of life, and it could reduce the chance of having another stroke. Study characteristics 
 In July 2018 we identified 75 studies for inclusion in the review. The studies involved a total of 3617 participants at all stages of care including being in hospital or back living at home. Most of the people who took part were able to walk on their own. The studies tested different forms of fitness training; these included cardiorespiratory or 'endurance' training, resistance or 'strength' training, or mixed training, which is a combination of cardiorespiratory plus resistance training. Key results 
 We found that cardiorespiratory fitness training, particularly involving walking, can improve fitness, balance and walking after stroke. The improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness may reduce the chance of stroke hospitalisation by 7%. Mixed training improves walking ability and improves balance. Strength training may have a role in improving balance. So, overall it seems likely that people with stroke are likely to benefit the most from training that involves cardiorespiratory training and that involves some walking. However, there was not enough information to draw reliable conclusions about the impact of fitness training on other areas such as quality of life, mood, or cognitive function. Cognitive function is under‐investigated despite being a key outcome of interest for stroke survivors. There was no evidence that any of the different types of fitness training caused injuries or other health problems; exercise appears to be safe. We need more studies to examine the benefits that are most important to stroke survivors, in particular for those with more severe stroke who may be unable to walk. Quality of the evidence 
 Studies of fitness training can be difficult to carry out. We have the highest confidence in the estimates of benefit from cardiorespiratory training (moderate/high). The evidence for other training types is moderate to low. However, some consistent findings emerged with different studies all tending to show similar effects in different groups of participants.

          Related collections

          Most cited references299

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global Burden of Stroke.

          On the basis of the GBD (Global Burden of Disease) 2013 Study, this article provides an overview of the global, regional, and country-specific burden of stroke by sex and age groups, including trends in stroke burden from 1990 to 2013, and outlines recommended measures to reduce stroke burden. It shows that although stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years rates tend to decline from 1990 to 2013, the overall stroke burden in terms of absolute number of people affected by, or who remained disabled from, stroke has increased across the globe in both men and women of all ages. This provides a strong argument that "business as usual" for primary stroke prevention is not sufficiently effective. Although prevention of stroke is a complex medical and political issue, there is strong evidence that substantial prevention of stroke is feasible in practice. The need to scale-up the primary prevention actions is urgent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sample size slippages in randomised trials: exclusions and the lost and wayward.

            Proper randomisation means little if investigators cannot include all randomised participants in the primary analysis. Participants might ignore follow-up, leave town, or take aspartame when instructed to take aspirin. Exclusions before randomisation do not bias the treatment comparison, but they can hurt generalisability. Eligibility criteria for a trial should be clear, specific, and applied before randomisation. Readers should assess whether any of the criteria make the trial sample atypical or unrepresentative of the people in which they are interested. In principle, assessment of exclusions after randomisation is simple: none are allowed. For the primary analysis, all participants enrolled should be included and analysed as part of the original group assigned (an intent-to-treat analysis). In reality, however, losses frequently occur. Investigators should, therefore, commit adequate resources to develop and implement procedures to maximise retention of participants. Moreover, researchers should provide clear, explicit information on the progress of all randomised participants through the trial by use of, for instance, a trial profile. Investigators can also do secondary analyses on, for instance, per-protocol or as-treated participants. Such analyses should be described as secondary and non-randomised comparisons. Mishandling of exclusions causes serious methodological difficulties. Unfortunately, some explanations for mishandling exclusions intuitively appeal to readers, disguising the seriousness of the issues. Creative mismanagement of exclusions can undermine trial validity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Exercise for overweight or obesity

              Clinical trials have shown that exercise in adults with overweight or obesity can reduce bodyweight. There has been no quantitative systematic review of this in The Cochrane Library. To assess exercise as a means of achieving weight loss in people with overweight or obesity, using randomised controlled clinical trials. Studies were obtained from computerised searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases. The last search was conducted in January 2006. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials that examined body weight change using one or more physical activity intervention in adults with overweight or obesity at baseline and loss to follow-up of participants of less than 15%. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The 43 studies included 3476 participants. Although significant heterogeneity in some of the main effects' analyses limited ability to pool effect sizes across some studies, a number of pooled effect sizes were calculated. When compared with no treatment, exercise resulted in small weight losses across studies. Exercise combined with diet resulted in a greater weight reduction than diet alone (WMD -1.1 kg; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.5 to -0.6). Increasing exercise intensity increased the magnitude of weight loss (WMD -1.5 kg; 95% CI -2.3 to -0.7). There were significant differences in other outcome measures such as serum lipids, blood pressure and fasting plasma glucose. Exercise as a sole weight loss intervention resulted in significant reductions in diastolic blood pressure (WMD -2 mmHg; 95% CI -4 to -1), triglycerides (WMD -0.2 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.3 to -0.1) and fasting glucose (WMD -0.2 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.3 to -0.1). Higher intensity exercise resulted in greater reduction in fasting serum glucose than lower intensity exercise (WMD -0.3 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.5 to -0.2). No data were identified on adverse events, quality of life, morbidity, costs or on mortality. The results of this review support the use of exercise as a weight loss intervention, particularly when combined with dietary change. Exercise is associated with improved cardiovascular disease risk factors even if no weight is lost.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                146518
                Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                Wiley
                14651858
                March 20 2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Edinburgh; Physical Activity for Health Research Centre (PAHRC); St Leonards Land Holyrood Road Edinburgh Midlothian UK EH8 8AQ
                [2 ]University of the West of Scotland; Institute of Clinical Exercise and Health Science; Room A071A, Almada Building Hamilton UK ML3 0JB
                [3 ]University of Limerick; School of Allied Health, Ageing Research Centre, Health Research Institute; Limerick Ireland
                [4 ]University of Melbourne; The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health; Heidelberg Australia 3084
                [5 ]University of Limerick; School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education and Health Sciences; Limerick Ireland
                [6 ]Manchester Metropolitan University; Research Centre for Musculoskeletal Science and Sports Medicine, Faculty of Science and Engineering; John Dalton Building Chester Street Manchester UK M1 5GD
                [7 ]University of Aberdeen; Health Services Research Unit; Health Sciences Building Foresterhill Aberdeen UK AB25 2ZD
                [8 ]University of Edinburgh; Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences; Room S1642, Royal Infirmary Little France Crescent Edinburgh UK EH16 4SA
                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD003316.pub7
                7083515
                32196635
                1d89ecee-51a7-4091-99d2-96681223268f
                © 2020
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article