Voet Nicoline Bm, van der Kooi Elly L, Riphagen Ingrid I, Lindeman Eline, van Engelen Baziel Gm, Geurts A Ch
Department of Rehabilitation, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen Centre for Evidence Based Practice, Huispost 898, P.O. Box 9101, Nijmegen, Gelderland, Netherlands, 6500 HB.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20(1):CD003907. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003907.pub3.
Strength training or aerobic exercise programmes might optimise muscle and cardiorespiratory function and prevent additional disuse atrophy and deconditioning in people with a muscle disease.
To examine the safety and efficacy of strength training and aerobic exercise training in people with a muscle disease.
We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register (July 2009), the Cochrane Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field Register (October 2002, August 2008 and July 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2009) MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2009), EMBASE (January 1974 to July 2009), EMBASE Classic (1947 to 1973) and CINAHL (January 1982 to July 2009).
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing strength training or aerobic exercise programmes, or both, to no training, and lasting at least 10 weeks.For strength training Primary outcome: static or dynamic muscle strength. Secondary: muscle endurance or muscle fatigue, functional assessments, quality of life, muscle membrane permeability, pain and experienced fatigue.For aerobic exercise training Primary outcome: aerobic capacity expressed as work capacity. Secondary: aerobic capacity (oxygen consumption, parameters of cardiac or respiratory function), functional assessments, quality of life, muscle membrane permeability, pain and experienced fatigue.
Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data.
We included three trials (121 participants). The first compared the effect of strength training versus no training in 36 people with myotonic dystrophy. The second trial compared strength training versus no training, both combined with albuterol or placebo, in 65 people with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. The third trial compared combined strength training and aerobic exercise versus no training in 18 people with mitochondrial myopathy. In the myotonic dystrophy trial there were no significant differences between training and non-training groups for primary and secondary outcome measures. In the facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy trial only a +1.17 kg difference (95% confidence interval 0.18 to 2.16) in dynamic strength of elbow flexors in favour of the training group reached statistical significance. In the mitochondrial myopathy trial there were no significant differences in dynamic strength measures between training and non-training groups. Exercise duration and distance cycled in a submaximal endurance test increased significantly in the training group compared to the control group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In myotonic dystrophy and facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, moderate-intensity strength training appears not to do harm but there is insufficient evidence to conclude that it offers benefit. In mitochondrial myopathy, aerobic exercise combined with strength training appears to be safe and may be effective in increasing submaximal endurance capacity. Limitations in the design of studies in other muscle diseases prevent more general conclusions in these disorders.
力量训练或有氧运动计划可能会优化肌肉和心肺功能,并防止肌肉疾病患者出现额外的废用性萎缩和身体机能下降。
研究力量训练和有氧运动训练对肌肉疾病患者的安全性和有效性。
我们检索了Cochrane神经肌肉疾病组试验专门注册库(2009年7月)、Cochrane康复及相关疗法领域注册库(2002年10月、2008年8月和2009年7月)、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(Cochrane图书馆2009年第3期)、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2009年7月)、EMBASE(1974年1月至2009年7月)、EMBASE经典库(1947年至1973年)和CINAHL(1982年1月至2009年7月)。
随机或半随机对照试验,比较力量训练或有氧运动计划,或两者与无训练的差异,且持续至少10周。对于力量训练,主要结局:静态或动态肌肉力量。次要结局:肌肉耐力或肌肉疲劳、功能评估、生活质量、肌膜通透性、疼痛和体验到的疲劳。对于有氧运动训练,主要结局:以工作能力表示的有氧能力。次要结局:有氧能力(耗氧量、心脏或呼吸功能参数)、功能评估、生活质量、肌膜通透性、疼痛和体验到的疲劳。
两位作者独立评估试验质量并提取数据。
我们纳入了三项试验(121名参与者)。第一项试验比较了36名强直性肌营养不良患者力量训练与无训练的效果。第二项试验比较了65名面肩肱型肌营养不良患者力量训练与无训练,两者均联合沙丁胺醇或安慰剂的效果。第三项试验比较了18名线粒体肌病患者联合力量训练和有氧运动与无训练的效果。在强直性肌营养不良试验中,训练组和非训练组在主要和次要结局指标上无显著差异。在面肩肱型肌营养不良试验中,仅训练组肘部屈肌动态力量有+1.17千克的差异(95%置信区间0.18至2.16),有利于训练组,达到统计学显著性。在线粒体肌病试验中,训练组和非训练组在动态力量测量上无显著差异。与对照组相比,训练组在次最大耐力试验中的运动持续时间和骑行距离显著增加。
在强直性肌营养不良和面肩肱型肌营养不良中,中等强度的力量训练似乎无害,但没有足够证据得出其有益的结论。在线粒体肌病中,有氧运动联合力量训练似乎是安全的,并且可能有效提高次最大耐力能力。其他肌肉疾病研究设计的局限性妨碍了在这些疾病中得出更普遍的结论。