| Literature DB >> 28891419 |
Bechir Frih1, Wajdi Mkacher2, Abir Bouzguenda3, Hamdi Jaafar4,5, Salem Ali ALkandari6, Zohra Ben Salah7, Bart Sas8, Mohamed Hammami1, Ameur Frih9.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether listening to Holy Qur'an recitation would augment the beneficial effects of physical exercise on physiological and psychological measures in elderly patients undergoing haemodialysis. Fifty-three male haemodialysis patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group (listening to Holy Qur'an recitation in combination with endurance-resistance training, n = 28) or a control group (endurance-resistance training only, n = 25). Functional capacity was assessed using the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) and the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Psychosocial outcomes were assessed using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Dialysis adequacy (Kt/V) was calculated for all patients. After intervention, a significant Group × Period interaction effect was observed for all measured parameters (p < 0.05), except for 6MWT performance (p > 0.05). All measured parameters were significantly improved over baseline in both groups, except for Kt/V in the control group (p > 0.05). Moreover, final measurements were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group for all measured parameters, except for 6MWT performance and the physical component summary of the SF-36 (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the present study showed that listening to a recitation of the Holy Qur'an in combination with interdialytic endurance-resistance training induced an improvement in physical condition and quality of life and a large reduction in anxiety among patients undergoing haemodialysis.Entities:
Keywords: End-stage renal disease; Holy Qur’an recitation; anxiety; depression; exercise; quality of life
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28891419 PMCID: PMC5650043 DOI: 10.1080/19932820.2017.1372032
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Libyan J Med ISSN: 1819-6357 Impact factor: 1.657
Baseline and final measurements for the two groups.
| Variable | Control group ( | Intervention group ( | Global effect | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Final | Baseline | Final | Group | Period | Interaction | |
| Anxiety | 16.2 ± 1.5 | 13.2 ± 1.1* | 15.8 ± 2.5 | 9.3 ± 2.1*† | # | # | # |
| Depression | 15.1 ± 2.1 | 11.3 ± 2.0* | 14.9 ± 2.1 | 9.4 ± 1.9*† | # | # | # |
| MCS | 53.8 ± 10.1 | 60.7 ± 11.1* | 53.2 ± 9.1 | 76.3 ± 10.2*† | # | # | # |
| PCS | 52.5 ± 9.5 | 64.9 ± 11.7* | 49.7 ± 7.9 | 70.0 ± 7.1* | # | # | # |
| 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.1*† | # | # | # | |
| TUG (s) | 14.1 ± 2.1 | 11.8 ± 1.8* | 14.4 ± 2.3 | 9.9 ± 1.7*† | NS | # | # |
| 6MWD (m) | 390.6 ± 17.8 | 470.4 ± 28.0* | 398.1 ± 15.1 | 468.9 ± 19.4* | NS | # | NS |
Data are shown as mean ± SD.
MCS, Mental Component Summary of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36); PCS, Physical Component Summary of the SF-36; Kt/V, dialysis adequacy; TUG, Timed Up and Go test; 6MWD, Six-Minute Walk Test distance.
*Significantly different from corresponding baseline value (p < 0.05); †significantly different from control group (p < 0.05); #significant global effect (p < 0.05); NS, not significant (p > 0.05).
Figure 1.Within-group relative changes for anxiety, depression, mental component summary of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (MCS), physical component summary of the SF-36 (PCS), dialysis adequacy (Kt/V), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), and the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) in the intervention group (black symbols) and the control group (empty symbols). Bars indicate uncertainty in the true mean changes with 95% confidence intervals. Trivial areas were calculated based on the smallest worthwhile change test. All parameters were almost certainly improved for both groups, expect for Kt/V in the control group (likely). Note that for clarity, all differences are presented as improvements for each group, so that negative and positive changes are displayed in the same direction.
Changes observed for the experimental group compared to the control group.
| Variable | Effect size (95% CI) | Rating | % Chances of better/trivial/poorer effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anxiety | −1.60 (−2.23 to −0.97) | Large | 100/0/0 |
| Depression | −0.78 (−1.42 to −0.15) | Medium | 96/3/0 |
| MCS | 1.66 (0.99 to 2.33) | Large | 100/0/0 |
| PCS | 0.88 (0.37 to 1.39) | Large | 99/1/0 |
| 1.77 (1.14 to 2.39) | Large | 100/0/0 | |
| TUG (s) | −1.00 (−1.62 to −0.37) | Large | 99/1/0 |
| 6MWD (m) | −0.52 (−1.37 to 0.32) | Medium | 5/18/78 |
MCS, Mental Component Summary of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36); PCS, Physical Component Summary of the SF-36; Kt/V, dialysis adequacy; TUG, Timed Up and Go test; 6MWD, 6-Minute Walk Test distance; CI, confidence interval.
Figure 2.Relative differences between the intervention and the control group for anxiety, depression, mental component summary of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (MCS), physical component summary of the SF-36 (PCS), dialysis adequacy (Kt/V), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), and the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Bars indicate uncertainty in the true mean changes with 95% confidence intervals. Trivial areas were calculated based on the smallest worthwhile change test.