Search

Low back pain is the most frequently reported musculoskeletal disorder and represents one of the highest patient burdens in healthcare. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Pilates exercise on pain intensity and functional disability caused by low back pain (LBP). A Systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted. Data sources: MEDLINE-NLM and MEDLINE-EBSCO. We also searched on Scopus Elsevier, Cochrane, DOAJ, SciELO, PEDro, and PLOS ONE databases. Eligibility criteria: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating LBP in which the primary treatment was based on Pilates exercise compared with no exercise, or non-specific exercise. The search returned 1566 records of which 36 articles were included in the systematic review and 19 in the meta-analysis. Twenty-two studies compared the effects of Pilates exercise vs no exercise and 13 studies examined the effects of Pilates exercise vs non-specific exercise. Analysis showed that Pilates had a positive effect on the perception of LBP vs no exercise. A similar trend occurred with non-specific exercise. Pilates exercise can decrease LBP compared to no exercise and non-specific exercise. General practitioners should consider Pilates exercise as an effective strategy to manage LBP and counteract the growing health. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022308387. Pilates is a good strategy for improving low back pain and is more effective than other exercise programs or no exercise. Pilates is a safe tool to apply to most of the population with low back pain. Pilates is a non-pharmacological strategy useful for counteracting low back pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We systemically reviewed published studies that evaluated aerobic exercise interventions in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) to: (1) report the frequency, intensity, type and time (FITT) of exercise prescriptions and (2) quantify the changes in markers of cardiovascular health and systemic inflammation.Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus; inception to January 2019.Eligibility Criteria: Randomised clinical trials (RCT), cohort studies, case series.Design: We summarised exercise prescriptions for all studies and calculated effect sizes with 95% CIs for between-group (RCTs that compared exercise and control groups) and within-group (pre-post exercise) differences in aerobic capacity (VO2), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and inflammatory markers (interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumour necrosis factor-alpha). We pooled results where possible using random effects models.Results: Interventions from 49 studies were summarised; 8% (4/49) met all FITT guidelines; 16% (8/49) met all or most FITT guidelines. Fourteen studies (10 RCTs) reported at least one marker of cardiovascular health or systemic inflammation. Mean differences (95% CI) indicated a small to moderate increase in VO2 (0.84 mL/min/kg; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31), decrease in HR (-3.56 beats per minute; 95% CI -5.60 to -1.52) and DBP (-4.10 mm Hg; 95% CI -4.82 to -3.38) and no change in SBP (-0.36 mm Hg; 95% CI -3.88 to 3.16) and IL-6 (0.37 pg/mL; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.85). Within-group differences were also small to moderate.Conclusions: In studies of aerobic exercise in patients with knee OA, very few interventions met guideline-recommended dose; there were small to moderate changes in markers of cardiovascular health and no decrease in markers of systemic inflammation. These findings question whether aerobic exercise is being used to its full potential in patients with knee OA.Prospero Registration Number: CRD42018087859. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To determine if current exercise interventions were effective at improving physical activity (PA) levels and/or cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in postpartum women. DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to March 2024. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants : postpartum women; intervention : exercise; control : standard care; outcomes : PA levels and/or CRF. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random effects meta-analysis using standardized mean differences (SMDs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - Intervention (ROBINS-I). RESULTS: A total of 6041 studies were screened, and 29 were eligible for inclusion. Nineteen studies with adequate control data included outcomes related to PA levels (n = 12) or CRF (n = 7) and were pooled in meta-analyses. There was a small to moderate improvement in CRF (SMD, 0.65; 95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.20, 1.10; I 2 = 61%). There was no improvement in PA levels (SMD, -0.13; 95% CI: -0.53, 0.26; I 2 = 90%). Frequency, intensity, type, and time of the exercise interventions varied. Twenty-three studies were at high or serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Postpartum exercise interventions may improve CRF but have an unclear effect on PA levels. Despite numerous exercise interventions to improve health outcomes postpartum, parameters were inconsistent. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(11):687-701. Epub 9 October 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12666 .