Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Academic Surgical Unit, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University London, London, UK.
Br J Cancer. 2014 Feb 18;110(4):831-41. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.750. Epub 2013 Dec 12.
To systematically review the effects of interventions to improve exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer.
Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an exercise intervention to a usual care comparison in sedentary people with a homogeneous primary cancer diagnosis, over the age of 18 years were eligible. The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials MEDLINE; EMBASE; AMED; CINAHL; PsycINFO; SportDiscus; PEDro from inception to August 2012.
Fourteen trials were included in this review, involving a total of 648 participants. Just six trials incorporated prescriptions that would meet current recommendations for aerobic exercise. However, none of the trials included in this review reported intervention adherence of 75% or more for a set prescription that would meet current aerobic exercise guidelines. Despite uncertainty around adherence in many of the included trials, the interventions caused improvements in aerobic exercise tolerance at 8-12 weeks (SMD=0.73, 95% CI=0.51-0.95) in intervention participants compared with controls. At 6 months, aerobic exercise tolerance is also improved (SMD=0.70, 95% CI=0.45-0.94), although four of the five trials had a high risk of bias; hence, caution is warranted in its interpretation.
Expecting the majority of sedentary survivors to achieve the current exercise guidelines is likely to be unrealistic. As with all well-designed exercise programmes, prescriptions should be designed around individual capabilities and frequency, duration and intensity or sets, repetitions, intensity of resistance training should be generated on this basis.
系统评价改善患有癌症或已康复的久坐人群运动行为的干预措施的效果。
仅纳入比较针对久坐、患有单一原发性癌症且年龄大于 18 岁的人群的运动干预与常规护理的随机对照试验（RCT）。检索了以下电子数据库： Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库（Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials）、MEDLINE、EMBASE、AMED、CINAHL、PsycINFO、SportDiscus、PEDro 自成立至 2012 年 8 月。
本综述纳入了 14 项试验，共涉及 648 名参与者。仅有 6 项试验纳入了符合当前有氧运动推荐的处方。然而，本综述纳入的试验均未报告达到当前有氧运动指南规定的 75%或更高的干预依从率。尽管许多纳入的试验对依从性的不确定性，但与对照组相比，干预组在 8-12 周时的有氧运动耐力得到改善（SMD=0.73，95% CI=0.51-0.95）。在 6 个月时，有氧运动耐力也得到改善（SMD=0.70，95% CI=0.45-0.94），尽管五项试验中有四项存在高偏倚风险，因此，其解释需要谨慎。
期望大多数久坐的幸存者达到当前的运动指南可能是不现实的。与所有精心设计的运动方案一样，应根据个人能力来制定处方，频率、持续时间和强度或组数、重复次数、阻力训练的强度都应在此基础上生成。
Zotero 插件