Wu Jinlong, Xu Zhuang, Liu Haowei, Chen Xiaoke, Huang Li, Shi Qiuqiong, Weng Linman, Ji Yemeng, Zeng Hao, Peng Li
College of Physical Education, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Department of Physical Education, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
JMIR Serious Games. 2023 Oct 19;11:e42697. doi: 10.2196/42697.
Exergames are promising exercise tools for improving health. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review has compared the effects of commercial exergames and conventional exercises on improving executive functions (EFs) in children and adolescents.
This study aimed to investigate the effects of commercial exergames and conventional exercises on improving EFs in children and adolescents.
Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 5 randomized controlled trial (RCT) databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus) were searched from their inception to July 7, 2022, to identify relevant RCTs. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias for each study. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence.
In total, 8 RCTs including 435 children and adolescents were included in the analysis. Commercial exergames had no significant benefit on overall EFs compared to conventional exercises (Hedges g=1.464, 95% CI -0.352 to 3.280; P=.06). For core EFs, there was no evidence to suggest that commercial exergames are more beneficial for improving cognitive flexibility (g=0.906, 95% CI -0.274 to 2.086; P=.13), inhibitory control (g=1.323, 95% CI -0.398 to 3.044; P=.13), or working memory (g=2.420, 95% CI -1.199 to 6.038; P=.19) than conventional exercises. We rated the evidence for overall EFs, cognitive flexibility, inhibitory control, and working memory as being of very low quality due to inconsistency (large heterogeneity) and imprecision (low number of people). Additionally, no effects of the intervention were observed in the acute and chronic groups.
We do not have strong evidence to support the benefit of commercial exergaming on EFs because we did not observe a Hedges g close to 0 with tight CIs. Further research is needed to confirm this hypothesis.
PROSPERO CRD42022324111; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=324111.
运动游戏是改善健康状况的有前景的锻炼工具。据我们所知，尚无系统评价比较商业运动游戏和传统运动对改善儿童和青少年执行功能（EFs）的效果。
本研究旨在调查商业运动游戏和传统运动对改善儿童和青少年EFs的效果。
遵循PRISMA（系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目）指南，检索了5个随机对照试验（RCT）数据库（PubMed、科学网、Scopus、PsycINFO和SPORTDiscus）自建库至2022年7月7日的数据，以识别相关RCT。使用Cochrane协作工具评估每项研究的偏倚风险。采用GRADE（推荐分级、评估、制定和评价）来评估证据的总体质量。
分析共纳入8项RCT，涉及435名儿童和青少年。与传统运动相比，商业运动游戏对整体EFs无显著益处（Hedges g=1.464，95%CI -0.352至3.280；P=0.06）。对于核心EFs，没有证据表明商业运动游戏在改善认知灵活性（g=0.906，95%CI -0.274至2.086；P=0.13）、抑制控制（g=1.323，95%CI -0.398至3.044；P=0.13）或工作记忆（g=2.420，95%CI -1.199至6.038；P=0.19）方面比传统运动更有益。由于不一致性（大异质性）和不精确性（人数少），我们将整体EFs、认知灵活性、抑制控制和工作记忆的证据质量评为极低。此外，在急性和慢性组中未观察到干预效果。
我们没有有力证据支持商业运动游戏对EFs有益，因为我们未观察到Hedges g接近0且置信区间狭窄的情况。需要进一步研究来证实这一假设。
PROSPERO CRD42022324111；https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=324111 。
