Hilde Bergum1, Irene Sandven2, Tor Ole Klemsdal3. 1. Department of Rehabilitation and Lifestyle Medicine, LHL-Hospital Gardermoen, Postboks 103 Jessheimbyen, 2051, Jessheim, Norway. hilde.bergum@lhl.no. 2. Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OCBE), Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 3. Department of Preventive Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evidence of the long-term effects of multiple lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk is uncertain. We aimed to summarize the evidence from randomized clinical trials examining the efficacy of lifestyle intervention on major cardiovascular risk factors in subjects at high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Eligible trials investigated the impact of lifestyle intervention versus usual care with minimum 24 months follow-up, reporting more than one major cardiovascular risk factor. A literature search updated April 15, 2020 identified 12 eligible studies. The results from individual trials were combined, using fixed and random effect models, using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to estimate effect sizes. Small-study effect was evaluated, and heterogeneity between studies examined, by subgroup and meta-regression analyses, considering patient- and study-level variables. RESULTS: Small-study effect was not identified. Lifestyle intervention reduced systolic blood pressure modestly with an estimated SMD of - 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): - 0.21 to - 0.04, with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 59%), corresponding to a mean difference of approximately 2 mmHg (MD = - 1.86, 95% CI - 3.14 to - 0.57, p = 0.0046). This effect disappeared in the subgroup of trials judged at low risk of bias (SMD = 0.02, 95% CI - 0.08 to 0.11). For the outcome total cholesterol SMD was - 0.06, 95% CI - 0.13 to 0.00, with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%), indicating no effect of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle intervention resulted in only a modest effect on systolic blood pressure and no effect on total cholesterol after 24 months. Further lifestyle trials should consider the challenge of maintaining larger long-term benefits to ensure impact on cardiovascular outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The evidence of the long-term effects of multiple lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk is uncertain. We aimed to summarize the evidence from randomized clinical trials examining the efficacy of lifestyle intervention on major cardiovascular risk factors in subjects at high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Eligible trials investigated the impact of lifestyle intervention versus usual care with minimum 24 months follow-up, reporting more than one major cardiovascular risk factor. A literature search updated April 15, 2020 identified 12 eligible studies. The results from individual trials were combined, using fixed and random effect models, using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to estimate effect sizes. Small-study effect was evaluated, and heterogeneity between studies examined, by subgroup and meta-regression analyses, considering patient- and study-level variables. RESULTS: Small-study effect was not identified. Lifestyle intervention reduced systolic blood pressure modestly with an estimated SMD of - 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): - 0.21 to - 0.04, with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 59%), corresponding to a mean difference of approximately 2 mmHg (MD = - 1.86, 95% CI - 3.14 to - 0.57, p = 0.0046). This effect disappeared in the subgroup of trials judged at low risk of bias (SMD = 0.02, 95% CI - 0.08 to 0.11). For the outcome total cholesterol SMD was - 0.06, 95% CI - 0.13 to 0.00, with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%), indicating no effect of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle intervention resulted in only a modest effect on systolic blood pressure and no effect on total cholesterol after 24 months. Further lifestyle trials should consider the challenge of maintaining larger long-term benefits to ensure impact on cardiovascular outcomes.
Authors: Donna K Arnett; Roger S Blumenthal; Michelle A Albert; Andrew B Buroker; Zachary D Goldberger; Ellen J Hahn; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Amit Khera; Donald Lloyd-Jones; J William McEvoy; Erin D Michos; Michael D Miedema; Daniel Muñoz; Sidney C Smith; Salim S Virani; Kim A Williams; Joseph Yeboah; Boback Ziaeian Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-03-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kadari Cissé; Sékou Samadoulougou; Yves Coppieters; Bruno Bonnechère; Patrice Zabsonré; Fati Kirakoya-Samadoulougou; Seni Kouanda Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Tobias N Bonten; Sanne Marije Verkleij; Rianne Mjj van der Kleij; Karin Busch; Wilbert B van den Hout; Niels H Chavannes; Mattijs E Numans Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 2.692