Andres Jung, Wolfgang Geidl, Leon Matting, Lina-Marie Hoessel, Waldemar Siemens, Gorden Sudeck, Klaus Pfeifer
{"title":"针对非传染性疾病患者的物理治疗和运动疗法中促进身体活动的干预措施的功效:系统综述》。","authors":"Andres Jung, Wolfgang Geidl, Leon Matting, Lina-Marie Hoessel, Waldemar Siemens, Gorden Sudeck, Klaus Pfeifer","doi":"10.1093/ptj/pzae053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to synthesize the evidence from systematic reviews on the efficacy of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including interventional elements explicitly aiming at physical activity promotion (PAP) in patients with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to February 28, 2023. Two independent reviewers screened the literature to identify systematic reviews that evaluated the effects of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including PAP interventions. Patient-reported and device-based measures of physical activity (PA) outcomes were included. Qualitative and quantitative data from systematic reviews were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Assessment of the methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). We assessed primary study overlap by calculating the corrected covered area and conducted the evidence synthesis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen systematic reviews were included in the present overview, including patients with a variety of NCDs. Most included systematic reviews had critically low (n = 5) to low (n = 7) methodological quality. Most meta-analyses (67%; 8/12) provided evidence supporting the short- and long-term efficacy of PAP interventions, but not all pooled estimates were clinically relevant. Only three of the systematic reviews with meta-analysis included an assessment of the certainty of the evidence. The evidence from systematic reviews without meta-analysis was inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of the present overview suggest that PAP interventions in physical therapy or exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs in the short and long term. The results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited certainty of evidence and critically low-to-low methodological quality of the included systematic reviews. Both high-quality primary studies and systematic reviews are required to confirm these results.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>There is limited evidence that PAP interventions in physical therapy and exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":20093,"journal":{"name":"Physical Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Physical Activity Promoting Interventions in Physical Therapy and Exercise Therapy for Persons With Noncommunicable Diseases: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Andres Jung, Wolfgang Geidl, Leon Matting, Lina-Marie Hoessel, Waldemar Siemens, Gorden Sudeck, Klaus Pfeifer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ptj/pzae053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to synthesize the evidence from systematic reviews on the efficacy of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including interventional elements explicitly aiming at physical activity promotion (PAP) in patients with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to February 28, 2023. Two independent reviewers screened the literature to identify systematic reviews that evaluated the effects of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including PAP interventions. Patient-reported and device-based measures of physical activity (PA) outcomes were included. Qualitative and quantitative data from systematic reviews were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Assessment of the methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). We assessed primary study overlap by calculating the corrected covered area and conducted the evidence synthesis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen systematic reviews were included in the present overview, including patients with a variety of NCDs. Most included systematic reviews had critically low (n = 5) to low (n = 7) methodological quality. Most meta-analyses (67%; 8/12) provided evidence supporting the short- and long-term efficacy of PAP interventions, but not all pooled estimates were clinically relevant. Only three of the systematic reviews with meta-analysis included an assessment of the certainty of the evidence. The evidence from systematic reviews without meta-analysis was inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of the present overview suggest that PAP interventions in physical therapy or exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs in the short and long term. The results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited certainty of evidence and critically low-to-low methodological quality of the included systematic reviews. Both high-quality primary studies and systematic reviews are required to confirm these results.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>There is limited evidence that PAP interventions in physical therapy and exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzae053\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzae053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究目的本研究旨在综合系统综述中关于物理治疗和运动治疗疗效的证据,包括明确旨在促进非传染性疾病(NCD)患者体力活动(PAP)的干预因素:方法:检索了 PubMed、Scopus、PsycINFO 和 Cochrane 系统综述数据库从开始到 2023 年 2 月 28 日的所有文献。两位独立审稿人对文献进行了筛选,以确定评估物理治疗和运动疗法(包括 PAP 干预)效果的系统性综述。其中包括患者报告的和基于设备的体育锻炼结果测量。由两名独立审稿人从系统综述中提取定性和定量数据。使用 AMSTAR 2(评估系统性综述的测量工具)对纳入的系统性综述进行方法学质量评估。我们通过计算校正覆盖面积来评估主要研究的重叠情况,并根据《科克伦干预措施系统综述手册》进行证据综合:本综述共纳入 14 篇系统综述,其中包括各种非传染性疾病患者。大多数纳入的系统综述的方法学质量为极低(5 篇)至低(7 篇)。大多数荟萃分析(67%;8/12)提供了支持 PAP 干预措施短期和长期疗效的证据,但并非所有汇总的估计值都具有临床相关性。只有 3 篇有荟萃分析的系统综述对证据的确定性进行了评估。未进行荟萃分析的系统综述中的证据尚无定论:本综述的结果表明,理疗或运动疗法中的 PAP 干预措施可在短期和长期内有效改善非传染性疾病患者的体力活动。由于证据的确定性有限,且所纳入的系统综述的方法学质量极低,因此应谨慎解释这些结果。需要高质量的初步研究和系统综述来证实这些结果:有限的证据表明,理疗和运动疗法中的 PAP 干预措施可有效改善非传染性疾病患者的体力活动。
Efficacy of Physical Activity Promoting Interventions in Physical Therapy and Exercise Therapy for Persons With Noncommunicable Diseases: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.
Objective: The objective of this study was to synthesize the evidence from systematic reviews on the efficacy of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including interventional elements explicitly aiming at physical activity promotion (PAP) in patients with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).
Methods: PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to February 28, 2023. Two independent reviewers screened the literature to identify systematic reviews that evaluated the effects of physical therapy and exercise therapy, including PAP interventions. Patient-reported and device-based measures of physical activity (PA) outcomes were included. Qualitative and quantitative data from systematic reviews were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Assessment of the methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). We assessed primary study overlap by calculating the corrected covered area and conducted the evidence synthesis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
Results: Fourteen systematic reviews were included in the present overview, including patients with a variety of NCDs. Most included systematic reviews had critically low (n = 5) to low (n = 7) methodological quality. Most meta-analyses (67%; 8/12) provided evidence supporting the short- and long-term efficacy of PAP interventions, but not all pooled estimates were clinically relevant. Only three of the systematic reviews with meta-analysis included an assessment of the certainty of the evidence. The evidence from systematic reviews without meta-analysis was inconclusive.
Conclusions: The results of the present overview suggest that PAP interventions in physical therapy or exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs in the short and long term. The results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited certainty of evidence and critically low-to-low methodological quality of the included systematic reviews. Both high-quality primary studies and systematic reviews are required to confirm these results.
Impact: There is limited evidence that PAP interventions in physical therapy and exercise therapy may be effective in improving PA for patients with NCDs.
期刊介绍:
Physical Therapy (PTJ) engages and inspires an international readership on topics related to physical therapy. As the leading international journal for research in physical therapy and related fields, PTJ publishes innovative and highly relevant content for both clinicians and scientists and uses a variety of interactive approaches to communicate that content, with the expressed purpose of improving patient care. PTJ"s circulation in 2008 is more than 72,000. Its 2007 impact factor was 2.152. The mean time from submission to first decision is 58 days. Time from acceptance to publication online is less than or equal to 3 months and from acceptance to publication in print is less than or equal to 5 months.