Search

Background: Musculoskeletal, ligamentous and osseous groin injuries are common in athletes and may result in a delay of several months to resume sports. Even then, this may not be at the former level of sport activity. The treatment of exercise-related groin pain is mainly conservative (non-surgical), using interventions such as exercises, electrotherapy, manual therapy and steroid injections., Objectives: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of conservative interventions for treating exercise-related musculotendinous, ligamentous and osseous groin pain., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2011); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1948 to November week 3 2011); EMBASE (1980 to Week 49 2011); CINAHL (1982 to December 2011); LILACS (1982 to December 2011); PEDro (1929 to December 2011), SPORTDiscus (1985 to December 2011), OTseeker (to December 2011), reference lists of papers and conference proceedings (2000 to 2011)., Selection Criteria: Randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating conservative interventions for treating exercise-related musculotendinous, ligamentous and osseous groin pain were included. Studies comparing conservative with surgical treatments were excluded., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data and conducted risk of bias assessments. There was no pooling of data., Main Results: Two studies, involving a total of 122 participants who had experienced adductor-related groin pain for at least two months, were included in this review. All but one of the participants were male athletes aged between 18 and 50 years old. Both studies were assessed as 'high risk of bias' for at least one source of bias domain. The 'successful treatment' outcome reported in both studies was based primarily on pain measures.One study, based on an intention-to-treat analysis, found a significant difference favouring exercise therapy (strengthening with an emphasis on the adductor and abdominal muscles and training muscular co-ordination) compared with 'conventional' physiotherapy (stretching exercises, electrotherapy and transverse friction massage) in successful treatment at 16-week follow-up (25/34 (74%) versus 10/34 (29%); risk ratio (RR) 2.50, 95% CI 1.43 to 4.37, P = 0.001). Similarly, of those followed-up significantly more athletes treated by exercise therapy returned to sport at the same level (23/29 (79%) versus 4/30 (13%); RR 5.95, 95% CI 2.34 to 15.09, P = 0.0002). Although still favouring the exercise group, the differences between the two groups in patients' subjective global assessment at 16 weeks and successful treatment at 8 to 12 years follow-up were not statistically significant.The second study (54 participants) found no significant differences at 16-week follow-up between a multi-modal treatment (heat, manual therapy and stretching) and exercise therapy (the same intervention as in the above study) for the outcomes of successful treatment (14/26 (54%) versus 12/22 (55%); RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.66, P = 0.96) and return to full sports participation (13/26 (50%) versus 12/22 (55%); RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.58, P = 0.75). Those returning to full sports participation returned on average 4.5 weeks earlier after receiving multi-modal therapy (mean difference -4.50 weeks, 95% CI -8.60 to -0.40, P = 0.03) than those in the exercise therapy group. This study reported that there were no complications or side effects found in either intervention group., Authors' Conclusions: The available evidence from the randomized trials is insufficient to advise on any specific conservative modality for treating exercise-related groin pain. While still low quality, the best evidence is from one trial which found that exercise therapy (strengthening of hip and abdominal muscles) in athletes improves short-term outcomes (based primarily on pain measures) and return to sports compared with physiotherapy consisting of passive modalities. Given the low quality of the available evidence from both included trials, further randomized trials are necessary to reinforce their findings.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aerobic physical training for treatment of chronic asymptomatic bacteriuria in subjects with spinal cord injury., Design: Randomized controlled trial., Setting: University hospital., Subjects: Forty-two participants with spinal cord injury between C8 and T12 segments were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups., Intervention: In the intervention group, subjects received a risk evaluation, stress test and urinary culture before the start of the study and after 16 weeks. The study consisted of aerobic physical conditioning with moderate intensity for the intervention group while the control group was asked to maintain their daily life activities., Main Measures: Increase of estimated peak oxygen consumption and also if there was a decrease in the proportions of positive urinary culture., Results: The intervention group showed an increase of estimated peak oxygen consumption of between 939 (714-1215) and 1154 (1005-1351) mL/min (P = 0.009) and a reduction of chronic asymptomatic bacteria of between 52.3% (29.8-74.3%) and 14.2% (3-36.3%) (P < 0.001). No adverse effects related to physical activity were recorded during the period of training., Conclusion: The regular practice of physical activity of moderate intensity applied to patients with spinal cord injury may be an effective and safe method for the treatment of chronic asymptomatic bacteriuria.

Background: Although physical fitness has been suggested to improve physical and psychosocial health for a variety of population profiles, there is a lack of information about the safety and effectiveness of aerobic exercise for adults with Down syndrome., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aerobic exercise training programmes for physiological and psychosocial outcomes in adults with Down syndrome., Search Strategy: The following electronic databases were searched: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2009, Issue 1); MEDLINE (1966 to August 2009); EMBASE (1980 to August 2009); CINAHL (1982 to August 2009); LILACS (1982 to August 2009); PsycINFO (1887 to August 2009); ERIC (1966 to August 2009); Current Controlled Trials (August 2009); and Campbell Collaboration's Social, Psychological, Educational and Criminological Register (C2- SPECTR) (to August 2009). Information about ongoing clinical trials was sought by searching ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov) (accessed August 2009), and the National Research Register (NRR) (2009 Issue 1)., Selection Criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials using supervised aerobic exercise training programmes with behavioral components accepted as co-interventions., Data Collection and Analysis: Two reviewers selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Where appropriate, data were pooled using meta-analysis with a random-effects model. Positive values favour the intervention group, while negative values favour the control group., Main Results: Three studies included in this systematic review used different kinds of aerobic activity: walking/jogging and rowing training and included participants with a broad age range (17 to 65 years). They were conducted in the USA, Portugal and Israel. In the meta-analyses, only maximal treadmill grade was improved after aerobic exercise training programmes (4.26 grades (%) [95% CI 2.06, 6.45]). Other variables relative to work performance that could not be combined in a meta-analysis were also improved in the intervention group (maximal test time P=0.0003), total turns of fan wheel (P=0.02), resistance of ergometer (p=0.003), power knee extension and flexion (p<0.00001), and timed up and go test (p=0.008). Thirty other outcomes measured in this review including, oxidative stress and body composition variables, could not be combined in the meta-analysis. Apart from work performance, trials reported no statistically significant improvements., Authors' Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that there is improvement in physical or psychosocial outcomes of aerobic exercise in adults with Down syndrome. Although evidence exists to support improvements in physiological and psychological aspects from strategies using mixed physical activity programmes, well-conducted research examining long-term physical outcomes, adverse effects, psychosocial outcomes and costs is required before informed practice decisions can be made.

Background: Although physical fitness has been suggested to improve physical and psychosocial health for a variety of population profiles, there is a lack of information about the safety and effectiveness of aerobic exercise for adults with Down syndrome., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aerobic exercise training programmes for physiological and psychosocial outcomes in adults with Down syndrome., Search Strategy: Search terms and synonyms for "aerobic exercise" and "Down syndrome" were used within the following databases: CENTRAL (2007, Issue 1); MEDLINE via PUBMED (1966 to March 2007); EMBASE (2005 to April 2007); CINAHL (1982 to March 2007); LILACS (1982 to March 2007); PsycINFO (1887 to March 2007); ERIC (1966 to March 2007); CCT (March 2007); Academic Search Elite (to March 2007), C2- SPECTR (to March 2007 ), NRR (2007 Issue 1), ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed March 2007) and within supplements of Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise., Selection Criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials using supervised aerobic exercise training programmes with behavioral components accepted as co-interventions., Data Collection and Analysis: Two reviewers selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Where appropriate, data was pooled using meta-analysis with a random effects model, Main Results: The two studies included in this trial used different kinds of aerobic activity: walking/jogging and rowing training. One included study was conducted in the USA, the other in Portugal. In the meta-analyses, only maximal treadmill grade, a work performance variable, was improved in the intervention group after aerobic exercise training programmes (-4.26 [95% CI -6.45, -2.06]) grade. The other outcomes in the meta-analysis showed no significant differences between intervention and control groups, as expressed by weighted mean difference: VO(2) peak -0.30 (95% CI -377, 3.17) mL.Kg.min(-1); peak heart rate, -2.84 (95% CI -10.73, 5.05) bpm; respiratory exchange ratio, 0.01 (95% CI -0.04, 0.06); pulmonary ventilation, -5.86 (95% CI -16.06, 4.34) L.min(-1). 30 other measures including work performance, oxidative stress and body composition variables could not be combined in the meta-analysis. Apart from work performance, trials reported no significant improvements in these measures., Authors' Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support improvement in physical or psychosocial outcomes of aerobic exercise in adults with Down syndrome. Although evidence exists which supports improvements in physiological and psychological aspects from strategies using mixed physical activity programmes, well-conducted research which examines long-term physical outcomes, adverse effects, psychosocial outcomes and costs are required before informed practice decisions can be made.