Department of Sport and Health, Health Science and Technology Research Centre, University of Évora, Portugal.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011 Dec;92(12):2071-81. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.06.018. Epub 2011 Oct 24.
To evaluate evidence for the effectiveness of the Pilates method of exercise (PME) in healthy people.
Published research was identified by searching Science Direct, MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Web of Science.
Research studies published from inception to May 7, 2011 were selected for evaluation. Two reviewers independently applied the inclusion criteria to selected potential studies. Studies were included if they were published in a peer-reviewed journal, written in the English language, conducted as a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or quasi-RCT in healthy people, had an inactive and/or exercise control group(s), included key study outcomes, and used the PME as the study intervention in at least 1 study arm.
Two reviewers independently extracted data (study, design, subjects, intervention, key outcomes results), applied the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale to assess the method quality of selected studies, and determined the strength of the evidence using the best evidence synthesis grading system.
Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. PEDro scale values ranged from 3 to 7 (mean, 4.1), indicating a low level of scientific rigor. The outcomes studied most often were flexibility, muscular endurance, strength, and postural alignment. The PME appears to be effective in improving flexibility (strong evidence), dynamic balance (strong evidence), and muscular endurance (moderate evidence) in healthy people.
There was strong evidence to support the use of the PME at least to the end of training to improve flexibility and dynamic balance and moderate evidence to enhance muscular endurance. Future RCTs should focus on the components of blinding, concealed allocation, subject adherence, intention-to-treat analysis, and follow-up designs.
评估普拉提运动（PME）对健康人群的有效性的证据。
通过在 Science Direct、MEDLINE、PubMed、SPORTDiscus、PEDro、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册、CINAHL 和 Web of Science 上搜索，确定已发表的研究。
选择评估从开始到 2011 年 5 月 7 日发表的研究。两位评审员独立应用纳入标准选择潜在的研究。如果研究发表在同行评议的期刊上，用英语书写，在健康人群中进行随机对照试验（RCT）或类 RCT，有非活动和/或运动对照组，包含关键研究结果，并且在至少 1 个研究臂中使用 PME 作为研究干预，则纳入研究。
两位评审员独立提取数据（研究、设计、对象、干预、关键结果），应用物理治疗证据数据库（PEDro）量表评估选定研究的方法质量，并使用最佳证据综合分级系统确定证据强度。
16 项研究符合纳入标准。PEDro 量表值范围为 3 至 7（平均值为 4.1），表明科学严谨性较低。研究最多的结果是灵活性、肌肉耐力、力量和姿势排列。PME 似乎能有效提高健康人群的灵活性（强证据）、动态平衡（强证据）和肌肉耐力（中等证据）。
有强有力的证据支持在培训结束时至少使用 PME 来提高灵活性和动态平衡，并具有中等证据来增强肌肉耐力。未来的 RCT 应侧重于盲法、隐藏分配、受试者依从性、意向治疗分析和随访设计的组成部分。
