慢性阻塞性肺病与健康对照组的步态差异:系统回顾与荟萃分析

IF 13.1 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL ACS Catalysis Pub Date : 2024-04-24 DOI:10.1183/16000617.0253-2023
J. Buekers, Laura Delgado-Ortiz, D. Megaritis, Ashley Polhemus, S. Breuls, S. Buttery, N. Chynkiamis, H. Demeyer, E. Gimeno-Santos, Emily Hume, Sarah Koch, P. Williams, M. Wuyts, N. Hopkinson, Ioannis Vogiatzis, Thierry Troosters, Anja Frei, Judith Garcia-Aymerich
{"title":"慢性阻塞性肺病与健康对照组的步态差异:系统回顾与荟萃分析","authors":"J. Buekers, Laura Delgado-Ortiz, D. Megaritis, Ashley Polhemus, S. Breuls, S. Buttery, N. Chynkiamis, H. Demeyer, E. Gimeno-Santos, Emily Hume, Sarah Koch, P. Williams, M. Wuyts, N. Hopkinson, Ioannis Vogiatzis, Thierry Troosters, Anja Frei, Judith Garcia-Aymerich","doi":"10.1183/16000617.0253-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Despite the importance of gait as a determinant of falls, disability and mortality in older people, understanding of gait impairment in COPD is limited. This study aimed to identify differences in gait characteristics during supervised walking tests between people with COPD and healthy controls. Methods We searched 11 electronic databases, supplemented by Google Scholar searches and manual collation of references, in November 2019 and updated the search in July 2021. Record screening and information extraction were performed independently by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second. Meta-analyses were performed in studies not considered at a high risk of bias. Results Searches yielded 21 085 unique records, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (including 1015 people with COPD and 2229 healthy controls). Gait speed was assessed in 17 studies (usual speed: 12; fast speed: three; both speeds: two), step length in nine, step duration in seven, cadence in six, and step width in five. Five studies were considered at a high risk of bias. Low-quality evidence indicated that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls at their usual speed (mean difference (MD) −19 cm·s−1, 95% CI −28 to −11 cm·s−1) and at a fast speed (MD −30 cm·s−1, 95% CI −47 to −13 cm·s−1). Alterations in other gait characteristics were not statistically significant. Conclusion Low-quality evidence shows that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls, which could contribute to an increased falls risk. The evidence for alterations in spatial and temporal components of gait was inconclusive. Gait impairment appears to be an important but understudied area in COPD.","PeriodicalId":9,"journal":{"name":"ACS Catalysis ","volume":"56 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gait differences between COPD and healthy controls: systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"J. Buekers, Laura Delgado-Ortiz, D. Megaritis, Ashley Polhemus, S. Breuls, S. Buttery, N. Chynkiamis, H. Demeyer, E. Gimeno-Santos, Emily Hume, Sarah Koch, P. Williams, M. Wuyts, N. Hopkinson, Ioannis Vogiatzis, Thierry Troosters, Anja Frei, Judith Garcia-Aymerich\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/16000617.0253-2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Despite the importance of gait as a determinant of falls, disability and mortality in older people, understanding of gait impairment in COPD is limited. This study aimed to identify differences in gait characteristics during supervised walking tests between people with COPD and healthy controls. Methods We searched 11 electronic databases, supplemented by Google Scholar searches and manual collation of references, in November 2019 and updated the search in July 2021. Record screening and information extraction were performed independently by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second. Meta-analyses were performed in studies not considered at a high risk of bias. Results Searches yielded 21 085 unique records, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (including 1015 people with COPD and 2229 healthy controls). Gait speed was assessed in 17 studies (usual speed: 12; fast speed: three; both speeds: two), step length in nine, step duration in seven, cadence in six, and step width in five. Five studies were considered at a high risk of bias. Low-quality evidence indicated that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls at their usual speed (mean difference (MD) −19 cm·s−1, 95% CI −28 to −11 cm·s−1) and at a fast speed (MD −30 cm·s−1, 95% CI −47 to −13 cm·s−1). Alterations in other gait characteristics were not statistically significant. Conclusion Low-quality evidence shows that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls, which could contribute to an increased falls risk. The evidence for alterations in spatial and temporal components of gait was inconclusive. Gait impairment appears to be an important but understudied area in COPD.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Catalysis \",\"volume\":\"56 33\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Catalysis \",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0253-2023\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Catalysis ","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0253-2023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 尽管步态是老年人跌倒、残疾和死亡的重要决定因素,但人们对慢性阻塞性肺病步态障碍的了解却很有限。本研究旨在确定慢性阻塞性肺病患者与健康对照组在监督步行测试中步态特征的差异。方法 我们于 2019 年 11 月检索了 11 个电子数据库,并辅以谷歌学术搜索和人工整理参考文献,于 2021 年 7 月更新了检索结果。记录筛选和信息提取由一名审稿人独立完成,并由另一名审稿人检查其准确性。对不存在高偏倚风险的研究进行了元分析。结果 搜索共获得 21 085 条独特记录,其中 25 条被纳入系统综述(包括 1015 名慢性阻塞性肺病患者和 2229 名健康对照者)。17项研究对步速进行了评估(通常速度:12项;快速速度:3项;两种速度:2项),9项研究评估了步长,7项研究评估了步长,6项研究评估了步速,5项研究评估了步宽。有五项研究被认为存在较高的偏倚风险。低质量证据表明,慢性阻塞性肺病患者在正常速度下比健康对照组走得慢(平均差异(MD)-19 cm-s-1,95% CI -28 至 -11 cm-s-1),在快速速度下也比健康对照组走得慢(MD -30 cm-s-1,95% CI -47 至 -13 cm-s-1)。其他步态特征的变化没有统计学意义。结论 低质量的证据表明,慢性阻塞性肺病患者的步行速度比健康对照组慢,这可能会导致跌倒风险增加。关于步态的空间和时间变化的证据尚无定论。步态障碍似乎是慢性阻塞性肺病的一个重要领域,但研究不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Gait differences between COPD and healthy controls: systematic review and meta-analysis
Background Despite the importance of gait as a determinant of falls, disability and mortality in older people, understanding of gait impairment in COPD is limited. This study aimed to identify differences in gait characteristics during supervised walking tests between people with COPD and healthy controls. Methods We searched 11 electronic databases, supplemented by Google Scholar searches and manual collation of references, in November 2019 and updated the search in July 2021. Record screening and information extraction were performed independently by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second. Meta-analyses were performed in studies not considered at a high risk of bias. Results Searches yielded 21 085 unique records, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (including 1015 people with COPD and 2229 healthy controls). Gait speed was assessed in 17 studies (usual speed: 12; fast speed: three; both speeds: two), step length in nine, step duration in seven, cadence in six, and step width in five. Five studies were considered at a high risk of bias. Low-quality evidence indicated that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls at their usual speed (mean difference (MD) −19 cm·s−1, 95% CI −28 to −11 cm·s−1) and at a fast speed (MD −30 cm·s−1, 95% CI −47 to −13 cm·s−1). Alterations in other gait characteristics were not statistically significant. Conclusion Low-quality evidence shows that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls, which could contribute to an increased falls risk. The evidence for alterations in spatial and temporal components of gait was inconclusive. Gait impairment appears to be an important but understudied area in COPD.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Catalysis
ACS Catalysis CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL-
CiteScore
20.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
1253
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: ACS Catalysis is an esteemed journal that publishes original research in the fields of heterogeneous catalysis, molecular catalysis, and biocatalysis. It offers broad coverage across diverse areas such as life sciences, organometallics and synthesis, photochemistry and electrochemistry, drug discovery and synthesis, materials science, environmental protection, polymer discovery and synthesis, and energy and fuels. The scope of the journal is to showcase innovative work in various aspects of catalysis. This includes new reactions and novel synthetic approaches utilizing known catalysts, the discovery or modification of new catalysts, elucidation of catalytic mechanisms through cutting-edge investigations, practical enhancements of existing processes, as well as conceptual advances in the field. Contributions to ACS Catalysis can encompass both experimental and theoretical research focused on catalytic molecules, macromolecules, and materials that exhibit catalytic turnover.
期刊最新文献
Issue Editorial Masthead Issue Publication Information Capturing Catalysis: Structural Insights into the Acyl-Enzyme Intermediate of Priestia megaterium Penicillin G Acylase Generative Active Learning Discovers High-Performance O2 Reduction Catalysts for H2O2 Production Localized Coexistence of Moiré and Serrated Stackings in a Copper-Melamine Framework Boosts Photocatalytic CO2 Conversion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1