-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Osteoarthritis is a chronic disease characterized by joint pain, tenderness, and limitation of movement. At present, no cure is available. Thus only treatment of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Osteoarthritis is a chronic disease characterized by joint pain, tenderness, and limitation of movement. At present, no cure is available. Thus only treatment of the person's symptoms and treatment to prevent further development of the disease are possible. Clinical trials indicate that aquatic exercise may have advantages for people with osteoarthritis. This is an update of a published Cochrane review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of aquatic exercise for people with knee or hip osteoarthritis, or both, compared to no intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 28 April 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2014), MEDLINE (from 1949), EMBASE (from 1980), CINAHL (from 1982), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), and Web of Science (from 1945). There was no language restriction.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled clinical trials of aquatic exercise compared to a control group (e.g. usual care, education, social attention, telephone call, waiting list for surgery) of participants with knee or hip osteoarthritis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included trials. We analysed the pooled results using standardized mean difference (SMD) values.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine new trials met the inclusion criteria and we excluded two earlier included trials. Thus the number of participants increased from 800 to 1190 and the number of included trials increased from six to 13. Most participants were female (75%), with an average age of 68 years and a body mass index (BMI) of 29.4. Osteoarthritis duration was 6.7 years, with a great variation of the included participants. The mean aquatic exercise duration was 12 weeks. We found 12 trials at low to unclear risk of bias for all domains except blinding of participants and personnel. They showed that aquatic exercise caused a small short term improvement compared to control in pain (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.15; 12 trials, 1076 participants) and disability (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.17; 12 trials, 1059 participants). Ten trials showed a small effect on quality of life (QoL) (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.01; 10 trials, 971 participants). These effects on pain and disability correspond to a five point lower (95% CI three to eight points lower) score on mean pain and mean disability compared to the control group (scale 0 to 100), and a seven point higher (95% CI 0 to 13 points higher) score on mean QoL compared with control group (scale 0 to 100). No included trials performed a radiographic evaluation. No serious adverse events were reported in the included trials with relation to aquatic exercise.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate quality evidence that aquatic exercise may have small, short-term, and clinically relevant effects on patient-reported pain, disability, and QoL in people with knee and hip OA. The conclusions of this review update does not change those of the previous published version of this Cochrane review.
Topics: Aged; Balneology; Chronic Disease; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Male; Osteoarthritis, Hip; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Swimming; Water
PubMed: 27007113
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005523.pub3 -
Acta Reumatologica Portuguesa Jul 2019The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to know, based on the available randomized controlled trials, if the non-surgical and non-pharmacological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to know, based on the available randomized controlled trials, if the non-surgical and non-pharmacological interventions commonly used for knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients are effective and which are the most effective ones.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
RCTs were identified through electronic databases respecting the following terms to guide the search strategy: PICO (Patients - Humans with knee OA; Intervention - Non-surgical and non-pharmacological interventions; Comparison - Pharmacological, surgical, placebo, no intervention, or other non-pharmacological/non-surgical interventions; Outcomes - Pain, physical function and patient global assessment). The methodological quality of the selected publications was evaluated using the PEDro and GRADE scales. Additionally, a meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan. Only studies with similar control group, population characteristics, outcomes, instruments and follow-up, were compared in each analysis.
RESULTS
Initially, 52 RCTs emerge however, after methodological analysis, only 39 had sufficient quality to be included. From those, only 5 studies meet the meta-analysis criteria. Exercise (especially resistance training) had the best positive effects on knee OA patients. Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields and Moxibustion showed to be the most promising interventions from the others. Balance Training, Diet, Diathermy, Hydrotherapy, High Level Laser Therapy, Interferential Current, Mudpack, Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation, Musculoskeletal Manipulations, Shock Wave Therapy, Focal Muscle Vibration, stood out, however more studies are needed to fully recommend their use. Other interventions did not show to be effective or the results obtained were heterogeneous.
CONCLUSIONS
Exercise is the best intervention for knee OA patients. Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields and Moxibustion showed to be the most promising interventions from the others options available.
Topics: Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Physical Therapy Modalities; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31356585
DOI: No ID Found -
European Journal of Physical and... Dec 2017Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, inflammatory, progressive, disabling autoimmune disease affecting the central nervous system. Symptoms and signs of MS vary widely... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, inflammatory, progressive, disabling autoimmune disease affecting the central nervous system. Symptoms and signs of MS vary widely and patients may lose their ability to walk. To date the benefits of aquatic therapy often used for rehabilitation in MS patients have not been reviewed. The aim of this study was to systematically review the current state of aquatic treatment for persons with MS (hydrotherapy, aquatic therapy, aquatic exercises, spa therapy) and to evaluate the scientific evidence supporting the benefits of this therapeutic option.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The databases PubMed, Scopus, WoS and PEDro were searched to identify relevant reports published from January 1, 2011 to April 30, 2016.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Of 306 articles identified, only 10 fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 5 randomized controlled, 2 simple randomized quasi-experimental, 1 semi-experimental, 1 blind controlled pilot and 1 pilot.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence that aquatic treatment improves quality of life in affected patients was very good in two studies, good in four, fair in two and weak in two.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Multiple Sclerosis; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28215060
DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.17.04570-1 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2023Evidence regarding the management of several aspects of cerebral palsy improved in recent years. Still, discrepancies are reported in clinical practice. Italian...
BACKGROUND
Evidence regarding the management of several aspects of cerebral palsy improved in recent years. Still, discrepancies are reported in clinical practice. Italian professionals and stakeholders expressed the need of setting up updated, evidenced-based, shared statements, to address clinical practice in cerebral palsy rehabilitation. The objective of the present study was to provide an updated overview of the state of knowledge, regarding the management and motor rehabilitation of children and young people with cerebral palsy, as the framework to develop evidence-based recommendations on this topic.
METHODS
Guidelines and systematic reviews were searched, relative to evidence-based management and motor treatment, aimed at improving gross motor and manual function and activities, in subjects with cerebral palsy, aged 2-18 years. A systematic search according to the Patients Intervention Control Outcome framework was executed on multiple sites. Independent evaluators provided selection and quality assessment of the studies and extraction of data.
RESULTS
Four guidelines, 43 systematic reviews, and three primary studies were included. Agreement among guidelines was reported relative to the general requirements of management and motor treatment. Considering the subject's multidimensional profile, age and developmentally appropriate activities were recommended to set individual goals and interventions. Only a few approaches were supported by high-level evidence (i.e., bimanual therapy and constraint-induced movement therapy to enhance manual performance). Several task-specific active approaches, to improve gross motor function and gait, were reported (mobility and gait training, cycling, backward gait, and treadmill), based on low-level evidence. Increasing daily physical activity and countering sedentary behavior were advised. Based on the available evidence, non-invasive brain stimulation, virtual reality, action-observation therapy, hydrotherapy, and hippotherapy might be complementary to task or goal-oriented physical therapy programs.
CONCLUSION
A multiple-disciplinary family-centered evidence-based management is recommended. All motor rehabilitation approaches to minors affected by cerebral palsy must share the following fundamental characteristics: engaging active involvement of the subject, individualized, age and developmentally appropriate, goal-directed, skill-based, and preferably intensive and time-limited, but suitable for the needs and preferences of the child or young person and their family, and feasible considering the implications for themselves and possible contextual limitations.
PubMed: 37305763
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1171224 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Feb 2015Rehabilitation, with an emphasis on physiotherapy and exercise, is widely promoted after total knee replacement. However, provision of services varies in content and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rehabilitation, with an emphasis on physiotherapy and exercise, is widely promoted after total knee replacement. However, provision of services varies in content and duration. The aim of this study is to update the review of Minns Lowe and colleagues 2007 using systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of post-discharge physiotherapy exercise in patients with primary total knee replacement.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Cochrane CENTRAL to October 4(th) 2013 for randomised evaluations of physiotherapy exercise in adults with recent primary knee replacement. Outcomes were: patient-reported pain and function, knee range of motion, and functional performance. Authors were contacted for missing data and outcomes. Risk of bias and heterogeneity were assessed. Data was combined using random effects meta-analysis and reported as standardised mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD).
RESULTS
Searches identified 18 randomised trials including 1,739 patients with total knee replacement. Interventions compared: physiotherapy exercise and no provision; home and outpatient provision; pool and gym-based provision; walking skills and more general physiotherapy; and general physiotherapy exercise with and without additional balance exercises or ergometer cycling. Compared with controls receiving minimal physiotherapy, patients receiving physiotherapy exercise had improved physical function at 3-4 months, SMD -0.37 (95% CI -0.62, -0.12), and pain, SMD -0.45 (95% CI -0.85, -0.06). Benefit up to 6 months was apparent when considering only higher quality studies. There were no differences for outpatient physiotherapy exercise compared with home-based provision in physical function or pain outcomes. There was a short-term benefit favouring home-based physiotherapy exercise for range of motion flexion. There were no differences in outcomes when the comparator was hydrotherapy, or when additional balancing or cycling components were included. In one study, a walking skills intervention was associated with a long-term improvement in walking performance. However, for all these evaluations studies were under-powered individually and in combination.
CONCLUSION
After recent primary total knee replacement, interventions including physiotherapy and exercise show short-term improvements in physical function. However this conclusion is based on meta-analysis of a few small studies and no long-term benefits of physiotherapy exercise interventions were identified. Future research should target improvements to long-term function, pain and performance outcomes in appropriately powered trials.
Topics: Ambulatory Care; Arthralgia; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Exercise Therapy; Home Care Services; Humans; Knee Joint; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Walking
PubMed: 25886975
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-015-0469-6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review examined the effects of supervised group aquatic training programs (led by an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review examined the effects of supervised group aquatic training programs (led by an instructor). We defined aquatic training as exercising in a pool while standing at waist, chest, or shoulder depth. This review is part of the update of the 'Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome' review first published in 2002, and previously updated in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the benefits and harms of aquatic exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and AMED, as well as other sources (i.e., reference lists from key journals, identified articles, meta-analyses, and reviews of all types of treatment for fibromyalgia) from inception to October 2013. Using Cochrane methods, we screened citations, abstracts, and full-text articles. Subsequently, we identified aquatic exercise training studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Selection criteria were: a) full-text publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria, and b) between-group data for an aquatic intervention and a control or other intervention. We excluded studies if exercise in water was less than 50% of the full intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data (24 outcomes), of which we designated seven as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, stiffness, muscle strength, submaximal cardiorespiratory function, withdrawal rates and adverse effects. We resolved discordance through discussion. We evaluated interventions using mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out meta-analysis. In addition, we set and used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 aquatic exercise training studies (N = 881; 866 women and 15 men). Nine studies compared aquatic exercise to control, five studies compared aquatic to land-based exercise, and two compared aquatic exercise to a different aquatic exercise program.We rated the risk of bias related to random sequence generation (selection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), blinding of outcome assessors (detection bias), and other bias as low. We rated blinding of participants and personnel (selection and performance bias) and allocation concealment (selection bias) as low risk and unclear. The assessment of the evidence showed limitations related to imprecision, high statistical heterogeneity, and wide confidence intervals. Aquatic versus controlWe found statistically significant improvements (P value < 0.05) in all of the major outcomes. Based on a 100-point scale, multidimensional function improved by six units (MD -5.97, 95% CI -9.06 to -2.88; number needed to treat (NNT) 5, 95% CI 3 to 9), self reported physical function by four units (MD -4.35, 95% CI -7.77 to -0.94; NNT 6, 95% CI 3 to 22), pain by seven units (MD -6.59, 95% CI -10.71 to -2.48; NNT 5, 95% CI 3 to 8), and stiffness by 18 units (MD -18.34, 95% CI -35.75 to -0.93; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 24) more in the aquatic than the control groups. The SMD for muscle strength as measured by knee extension and hand grip was 0.63 standard deviations higher compared to the control group (SMD 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 12) and cardiovascular submaximal function improved by 37 meters on six-minute walk test (95% CI 4.14 to 69.92). Only two major outcomes, stiffness and muscle strength, met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance (improved by 27% and 37% respectively). Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and control groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects reported. Aquatic versus land-basedThere were no statistically significant differences between interventions for multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain or stiffness: 0.91 units (95% CI -4.01 to 5.83), -5.85 units (95% CI -12.33 to 0.63), -0.75 units (95% CI -10.72 to 9.23), and two units (95% CI -8.88 to 1.28) respectively (all based on a 100-point scale), or in submaximal cardiorespiratory function (three seconds on a 100-meter walk test, 95% CI -1.77 to 7.77). We found a statistically significant difference between interventions for strength, favoring land-based training (2.40 kilo pascals grip strength, 95% CI 4.52 to 0.28). None of the outcomes in the aquatic versus land comparison reached clinically relevant differences of 15%. Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and land groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects in either group. Aquatic versus aquatic (Ai Chi versus stretching in the water, exercise in pool water versus exercise in sea water)Among the major outcomes the only statistically significant difference between interventions was for stiffness, favoring Ai Chi (1.00 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low to moderate quality evidence relative to control suggests that aquatic training is beneficial for improving wellness, symptoms, and fitness in adults with fibromyalgia. Very low to low quality evidence suggests that there are benefits of aquatic and land-based exercise, except in muscle strength (very low quality evidence favoring land). No serious adverse effects were reported.
Topics: Adult; Exercise Therapy; Female; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Male; Muscle Strength; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25350761
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011336 -
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical... Jun 2022Water therapies as hydrotherapy, balneotherapy or aqua therapy are often used in the relief of disease- and treatment-associated symptoms of cancer patients. Yet, a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Water therapies as hydrotherapy, balneotherapy or aqua therapy are often used in the relief of disease- and treatment-associated symptoms of cancer patients. Yet, a systematic review for the evidence of water therapy including all cancer entities has not been conducted to date.
PURPOSE
Oncological patients often suffer from symptoms which in patients with other diseases are successfully treated with water therapy. We want to gather more information about the benefits and risks of water therapy for cancer patients.
METHOD
In May 2020, a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and PubMed) to find studies concerning the use, effectiveness and potential harm of water therapy on cancer patients.
RESULTS
Of 3165 search results, 10 publications concerning 12 studies with 430 patients were included in this systematic review. The patients treated with water therapy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts included aqua lymphatic therapy, aquatic exercises, foot bathes and whole-body bathes. Outcomes were state of lymphedema, quality of life, fatigue, BMI, vital parameters, anxiety and pain. The quality of the studies was assessed with the AMSTAR2-instrument, the SIGN-checklist and the IHE-Instruments. The studies had moderate quality and reported heterogeneous results. Some studies reported significantly improved quality of life, extent of lymphedema, neck and shoulder pain, fatigue and BMI while other studies did not find any changes concerning these endpoints.
CONCLUSION
Due to the very heterogeneous results and methodical limitations of the included studies, a clear statement regarding the effectiveness of water therapy on cancer patients is not possible.
Topics: Balneology; Breast Neoplasms; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Lymphedema; Quality of Life; Water
PubMed: 35171330
DOI: 10.1007/s00432-022-03947-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in community settings for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost-effective; however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of water for wound cleansing.
SEARCH METHODS
For this fifth update, in May 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed wound cleansing using different types of water (e.g. tap water, distilled, boiled) compared with no cleansing or with other solutions (e.g. normal saline). For this update, we excluded quasi-RCTs, thereby removing some studies which had been included in the previous version of the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently carried out trial selection, data extraction and GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 trials in this update including a total of 2504 participants ranging in age from two to 95 years. Participants in the trials experienced open fractures, surgical wounds, traumatic wounds, anal fissures and chronic wounds. The trials were conducted in six different countries with the majority conducted in India and the USA. Three trials involving 148 participants compared cleansing with tap water with no cleansing. Eight trials involving 2204 participants assessed cleansing with tap water compared with cleansing with normal saline. Two trials involving 152 participants assessed cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with normal saline. One trial involving 51 participants also assessed cleansing with cooled boiled water compared with cleansing with normal saline, and cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with cooled boiled water. Wound infection: no trials reported on wound infection for the comparison cleansing with tap water versus no cleansing. For all wounds, eight trials found the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.19); very low-certainty evidence. Two trials comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that the effect on the number of fractures that were infected is uncertain (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.09); very low-certainty evidence. One trial compared the use of cooled boiled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.87); very low-certainty evidence. This trial also compared the use of distilled water with cooled boiled water and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47); very low-certainty evidence. Wound healing: results from three trials comparing the use of tap water with no wound cleansing demonstrated there may be little or no difference in the number of wounds that did not heal between the groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14); low-certainty evidence. The effect of tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain; two trials were pooled (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.07) but the certainty of the evidence is very low. Results from one study comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that there may be little or no difference in the number of fractures that healed (RR could not be estimated, all wounds healed); the certainty of the evidence is low. Reduction in wound size: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound size reduction is uncertain (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.68); the certainty of the evidence is very low. Rate of wound healing: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound healing rate is uncertain (mean difference (MD) -3.06, 95% CI -6.70 to 0.58); the certainty of the evidence is very low.
COSTS
two trials reported cost analyses but the cost-effectiveness of tap water compared with the use of normal saline is uncertain; the certainty of the evidence is very low. Pain: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in pain scores. The certainty of the evidence is low. Patient satisfaction: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in patient satisfaction. The certainty of evidence is low. The effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain as the certainty of the evidence is very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All the evidence identified in the review was low or very low certainty. Cleansing with tap water may make little or no difference to wound healing compared with no cleansing; there are no data relating to the impact on wound infection. The effects of cleansing with tap water, cooled boiled water or distilled water compared with cleansing with saline are uncertain, as is the effect of distilled water compared with cooled boiled water. Data for other outcomes are limited across all the comparisons considered and are either uncertain or suggest that there may be little or no difference in the outcome.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Child; Child, Preschool; Drinking Water; Fractures, Open; Humans; Middle Aged; Pain; Saline Solution; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation; Wound Infection; Young Adult
PubMed: 36103365
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003861.pub4 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Sep 2014To investigate the effectiveness of aquatic exercise in the management of musculoskeletal conditions. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effectiveness of aquatic exercise in the management of musculoskeletal conditions.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from earliest record to May 2013.
STUDY SELECTION
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating aquatic exercise for adults with musculoskeletal conditions compared with no exercise or land-based exercise. Outcomes of interest were pain, physical function, and quality of life. The electronic search identified 1199 potential studies. Of these, 1136 studies were excluded based on title and abstract. A further 36 studies were excluded after full text review, and the remaining 26 studies were included in this review.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two reviewers independently extracted demographic data and intervention characteristics from included trials. Outcome data, including mean scores and SDs, were also extracted.
DATA SYNTHESIS
The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale identified 20 studies with high methodologic quality (PEDro score ≥6). Compared with no exercise, aquatic exercise achieved moderate improvements in pain (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], -.56 to -.18), physical function (SMD=.32; 95% CI, .13-.51), and quality of life (SMD=.39; 95% CI, .06-.73). No significant differences were observed between the effects of aquatic and land-based exercise on pain (SMD=-.11; 95% CI, -.27 to .04), physical function (SMD=-.03; 95% CI, -.19 to .12), or quality of life (SMD=-.10; 95% CI, -.29 to .09).
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests that aquatic exercise has moderate beneficial effects on pain, physical function, and quality of life in adults with musculoskeletal conditions. These benefits appear comparable across conditions and with those achieved with land-based exercise. Further research is needed to understand the characteristics of aquatic exercise programs that provide the most benefit.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Osteoarthritis; Pain; Pain Measurement; Physical Therapy Modalities; Quality of Life; Swimming
PubMed: 24769068
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.04.005 -
Medicine Dec 2018This study aimed to systemically review the effectiveness of aquatic exercise (AQE) compared to land-based exercise (LBE) in treating knee osteoarthritis (OA). (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to systemically review the effectiveness of aquatic exercise (AQE) compared to land-based exercise (LBE) in treating knee osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, CINAHL, and psyclNFO databases were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of AQE and LBE for knee OA from their inception date to September 24, 2018. The risk of bias was examined using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool, and Review Manager 5.3 was used for data collation and analysis.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs were included, involving a total of 579 patients. The meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference between AQE and LBE for pain relief, physical function, and improvement in the quality of life, for both short- and long-term interventions, in patients with knee OA. However, the adherence and satisfaction level for AQE was higher than for LBE. Compared to no intervention, AQE showed a mild effect for elevating activities of daily living (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-0.94, -0.16], P = .005) and a high effect for improving sports and recreational activities (SMD: -1.03, 95% CI [-1.82, -0.25], P = .01).
CONCLUSION
AQE is comparable to LBE for treating knee OA.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Male; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30593178
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013823