Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorConnolly, Luke
dc.contributor.authorTaul-Marsden, L
dc.contributor.authorDennett, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorFreeman, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorDalgas, U
dc.contributor.authorHvid, L
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-21T12:52:56Z
dc.date.issued2021-04-23
dc.identifier.issn0003-9993
dc.identifier.issn1532-821X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/17059
dc.description.abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate whether aerobic training (AT) or resistance training (RT) is most effective in terms of improving lower limb physical function and perceived fatigue in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). DATA SOURCES: Nine databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus) were electronically searched in April 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving PwMS attending 1 of 2 exercise interventions: AT or RT. Studies had to include at least 1 objective or self-reported outcome of lower extremity physical function and/or perceived fatigue. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted using a customized spreadsheet, which included detailed information on patient characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. The methodological quality of the included studies was independently assessed by 2 reviewers using the Tool for Assessment of Study Quality for Reporting on Exercise rating scale. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-seven articles reporting data from 22 RCTS (AT=14, RT=8) including 966 PwMS. The 2 modalities were found to be equally effective in terms of improving short walk test (AT: effect size [ES]=0.33 [95% confidence interval (CI), -1.49 to 2.06]; RT: ES=0.27 [95% CI, 0.07-0.47]) and long walk test performance (AT: ES=0.37 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.78]; RT: ES=0.36 [95% CI, -0.35 to 1.08]), as well as in reducing perceived fatigue (AT: ES=-0.61 [95% CI, -1.10 to -0.11]; RT: ES=-0.41 [95% CI, -0.80 to -0.02]). Findings on other functional mobility tests along with self-reported walking performance were sparse and inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: AT and RT appear equally highly effective in terms of improving lower extremity physical function and perceived fatigue in PwMS. Clinicians can thus use either modality to target impairments in these outcomes. In a future perspective, head-to-head exercise modality studies are warranted. Future MS exercise studies are further encouraged to adapt a consensus "core battery" of physical function tests to facilitate a detailed comparison of results across modalities.

dc.format.extent2032-2048
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectExercise
dc.subjectMultiple sclerosis
dc.subjectRehabilitation
dc.subjectSystematic review
dc.titleIs aerobic or resistance training the most effective exercise modality for improving lower extremity physical function and perceived fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeComparative Study
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeMeta-Analysis
dc.typeSystematic Review
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000709542300020&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue10
plymouth.volume102
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.apmr.2021.03.026
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Health Professions
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Researchers in ResearchFish submission
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-03-25
dc.rights.embargodate2021-6-4
dc.identifier.eissn1532-821X
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.apmr.2021.03.026
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-04-23
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV