The effectiveness of exercise with behavior change techniques in people with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review with meta‐analysis
The effectiveness of exercise with behavior change techniques in people with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review with meta‐analysis
复制标题
运动与行为改变技术对膝骨关节炎患者的有效性：荟萃分析的系统评价
DOI：
10.1002/pmrj.12898
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Morita Masaharu
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ariie Takashi;Takasaki Hiroshi;Okoba Ryota;Chiba Hiroki;Handa Yusuke;Miki Takahiro;Taito Shunsuke;Tsutsumi Yusuke;Morita Masaharu
目的：本荟萃分析系统综述的目的是研究行为改变技术（bct）运动对膝关节骨关节炎患者核心预后集的有效性。文献调查：截至2021年11月4日，我们在8个数据库（MEDLINE、Embase、CENTRAL、CINAHL、PsycINFO、PEDro、ICTRP和ClinicalTrials.gov）中检索了随机对照试验（rct）。方法研究对象为膝关节骨关节炎患者。干预是用bct进行锻炼。主要结局包括干预后6至12个月的身体功能、生活质量（QOL）和不良事件。次要结果是干预后3个月或更长时间的膝关节疼痛、运动依从性、活动能力和自我效能。使用risk of bias 2工具评估偏倚风险。meta分析采用随机效应模型。我们发现16个单独的BCT， 37.7%的试验使用单个BCT。meta分析纳入21项rct （n= 1623）。大多数结果的证据确定性非常低，偏倚风险是降低证据水平的一贯原因。95%可信区间（95% CI）的标准化平均差异（SMD）在身体机能方面为0.00(- 0.24,0.24)，运动依从性方面为0.33(- 0.51,1.17)，自我效能方面为0.04（- 0.39,0.47）。不良事件风险比（95% CI）为3.6（0.79,16.45）。由于数据不足（证据确定性非常低），没有汇总生活质量。相比之下，膝关节疼痛减轻和活动能力改善的SMD （95% CI）分别为- 0.33（- 0.53,- 0.13）和0.21(- 0.05,0.47)，证据确定性分别为中等和低。结论：关于bct结合运动对核心结果集的有效性，证据尚无定论。进一步的研究应探讨有效设计的bct的有效性。协议注册普洛斯佩罗（CRD42020212904）。
ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review with meta‐analysis was to examine the effectiveness of exercise with behavior change techniques (BCTs) on core outcome sets in people with knee osteoarthritis.Literature SurveyWe searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in eight databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) up to November 4, 2021.MethodologyEligible participants were people with knee osteoarthritis. The intervention was exercise with BCTs. Primary outcomes included physical function, quality of life (QOL) 6 to 12 months after intervention, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were knee pain, exercise adherence, mobility, and self‐efficacy 3 months or more after intervention. The bias risk was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. The random‐effects model was used for the meta‐analysis.SynthesisWe found 16 individual BCTs, and 37.7% of trials used a single BCT. For meta‐analysis, we included 21 RCTs (n= 1623). Most outcomes had a very low certainty of evidence, and the risk of bias was the consistent reason for downgrading evidence levels. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was 0.00 (−0.24, 0.24) in physical function, 0.33 (−0.51, 1.17) in exercise adherence, and 0.04 (−0.39, 0.47) in self‐efficacy. The risk ratio (95% CI) of adverse events was 3.6 (0.79, 16.45). QOL was not pooled due to insufficient data (very low certainty of evidence). In contrast, the SMD (95% CI) for knee pain reduction and mobility improvement was −0.33 (−0.53, −0.13) and 0.21 (−0.05, 0.47) with moderate and low certainty of evidence, respectively.ConclusionThe evidence is inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of BCTs with exercises on core outcome sets. Further research should explore the effectiveness of BCTs with valid design.Protocol RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42020212904).
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
Boutron, I;Tubach, F;Ravaud, P
通讯作者：
Ravaud, P
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Page MJ;McKenzie JE;Bossuyt PM;Boutron I;Hoffmann TC;Mulrow CD;Shamseer L;Tetzlaff JM;Akl EA;Brennan SE;Chou R;Glanville J;Grimshaw JM;Hróbjartsson A;Lalu MM;Li T;Loder EW;Mayo-Wilson E;McDonald S;McGuinness LA;Stewart LA;Thomas J;Tricco AC;Welch VA;Whiting P;Moher D
通讯作者：
Moher D
影响因子：
7
作者：
Allen KD;Arbeeva L;Callahan LF;Golightly YM;Goode AP;Heiderscheit BC;Huffman KM;Severson HH;Schwartz TA
通讯作者：
Schwartz TA
DOI：
10.1016/j.apmr.2019.12.023
发表时间：
2020-08-01
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Rewald, Stefanie;Lenssen, A. F. Ton;Mesters, Ilse
通讯作者：
Mesters, Ilse
[基于IMB模型的身体活动促进计划对患有膝骨关节炎的肥胖老年人的肥胖代谢健康结果的影响]。
影响因子：
1.5
作者：
Jung Suk Kim;Chun
通讯作者：
Chun