A Varahra1, I B Rodrigues2, J C MacDermid3, D Bryant3, T Birmingham3. 1. University of Western Ontario Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, 1151 Richmond St., London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada. avarahra@uwo.ca. 2. University School of Rehabilitation Science, 1400 Main Street W, IAHS 308, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. 3. School of Physical Therapy, 1151 Richmond St., London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada.
Abstract
Osteoporosis affects many aspects of daily life. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of exercise interventions on functional outcomes in persons with osteoporosis, in comparison with controls. METHODS: Four databases were searched and yielded 1587 citations. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, rated risk of bias, appraised methodological quality of studies, and resolved discordance by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies examining 2113 participants met inclusion criteria; 25 studies were suitable for meta-analyses. Four categories of exercise were identified using the ProFaNE taxonomy. After removing studies with high risk of bias and sorting them into intervention sub-types, we were able to sufficiently reduce the heterogeneity. The standardized mean difference (SMD) favored multicomponent exercise for mobility (- 0.56, 95% CI [- 0.81, - 0.32], p = 0.06, I2 = 51%); balance (0.50, 95% CI [0.27, 0.74], p = 0.28, I2 = 21%); and self-reported measures of functioning (- 0.69, 95% CI [- 1.04, - 0.34], p = 0.02, I2 = 61%). Trials were judged at low or unclear risk of selection bias, indicating inadequate reporting and at high risk of performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. The mean methodological quality rating of the studies was 63.5% indicating moderate quality. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent exercise program of high-speed training combined with simulated functional tasks is promising to enhance functional outcomes. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity of the target groups and specific demands of exercise modes, it is unclear which exercise program is optimal.
Osteoporosis affects many aspects of daily life. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of exercise interventions on functional outcomes in persons with osteoporosis, in comparison with controls. METHODS: Four databases were searched and yielded 1587 citations. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, rated risk of bias, appraised methodological quality of studies, and resolved discordance by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies examining 2113 participants met inclusion criteria; 25 studies were suitable for meta-analyses. Four categories of exercise were identified using the ProFaNE taxonomy. After removing studies with high risk of bias and sorting them into intervention sub-types, we were able to sufficiently reduce the heterogeneity. The standardized mean difference (SMD) favored multicomponent exercise for mobility (- 0.56, 95% CI [- 0.81, - 0.32], p = 0.06, I2 = 51%); balance (0.50, 95% CI [0.27, 0.74], p = 0.28, I2 = 21%); and self-reported measures of functioning (- 0.69, 95% CI [- 1.04, - 0.34], p = 0.02, I2 = 61%). Trials were judged at low or unclear risk of selection bias, indicating inadequate reporting and at high risk of performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. The mean methodological quality rating of the studies was 63.5% indicating moderate quality. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent exercise program of high-speed training combined with simulated functional tasks is promising to enhance functional outcomes. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity of the target groups and specific demands of exercise modes, it is unclear which exercise program is optimal.
Authors: Alexandra Papaioannou; Suzanne Morin; Angela M Cheung; Stephanie Atkinson; Jacques P Brown; Sidney Feldman; David A Hanley; Anthony Hodsman; Sophie A Jamal; Stephanie M Kaiser; Brent Kvern; Kerry Siminoski; William D Leslie Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-10-12 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Loretta Dipietro; Wayne W Campbell; David M Buchner; Kirk I Erickson; Kenneth E Powell; Bonny Bloodgood; Timothy Hughes; Kelsey R Day; Katrina L Piercy; Alison Vaux-Bjerke; Richard D Olson Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Luanda Alves Xavier Ramos; François Talles Medeiros Rodrigues; Lívia Shirahige; Maria de Fátima Alcântara Barros; Antônio Geraldo Cidrão de Carvalho; Marcelo Renato Guerino; Ana Paula de Lima Ferreira; Ricardo Oliveira Guerra; Maria das Graças Rodrigues de Araújo Journal: J Diabetes Metab Disord Date: 2019-02-27
Authors: Sofia Marini; Erica Leoni; Alessandra Raggi; Tiziana Sanna; Nazzarena Malavolta; Buffa Angela; Pasqualino Maietta Latessa; Laura Dallolio Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Marian E Papp; Ann Charlotte Grahn-Kronhed; Hans Rauch Lundin; Helena Salminen Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-11-16 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: Nicky Wilson; Emailie Hurkmans; Jo Adams; Margot Bakkers; Petra Balážová; Mark Baxter; Anne-Birgitte Blavnsfeldt; Karine Briot; Catharina Chiari; Cyrus Cooper; Razvan Dragoi; Gabriele Gäbler; Willem Lems; Erika Mosor; Sandra Pais; Cornelia Simon; Paul Studenic; Simon Tilley; Jenny de la Torre; Tanja A Stamm Journal: RMD Open Date: 2020-01
Authors: Jo Adams; Nicky Wilson; Emalie Hurkmans; Margot Bakkers; Petra Balážová; Mark Baxter; Anne-Birgitte Blavnsfeldt; Karine Briot; Catharina Chiari; Cyrus Cooper; Razvan Gabriel Dragoi; Gabriele Gäbler; Willem Lems; Erika Mosor; Sandra Pais; Cornelia Simon; Paul Studenic; Simon Tilley; Jenny de la Torre-Aboki; Tanja A Stamm Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 27.973