Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33516207›Full record

SynthesisRespiratory research2021

Effects of exercise-based pulmonary rehabilitation on adults with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhenzhen Feng, Jiajia Wang, Yang Xie, Jiansheng Li

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Respiratory research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Does pulmonary rehabilitation address treatable traits? A systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pulmonary rehabilitation versus usual care for adults with asthma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zhenzhen FengDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
Jiajia WangCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases By Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, 156 Jinshui East Road, Zhengzhou, 450046, China.
Yang XieCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases By Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, 156 Jinshui East Road, Zhengzhou, 450046, China.
Jiansheng LiCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases By Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, 156 Jinshui East Road, Zhengzhou, 450046, China. li_js8@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6485-2371

Funding

Central Plains Thousand People Program ZYQR201810159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been proposed as an effective method for many respiratory diseases. However, the effects of exercise-based PR on asthma are currently inconclusive. This review aimed to investigate the effects of exercise-based PR on adults with asthma.

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to 31 July 2019 without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of exercise-based PR on adults with asthma were included. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed by two investigators independently. Meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan software (version 5.3). Evidence quality was rated by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

resultsTen literatures from nine studies (n = 418 patients) were identified. Asthma quality of life questionnaire total scores (MD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.76) improved significantly in the experimental group compared to control group, including activity domain scores (MD = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.94), symptom domain scores (MD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.85), emotion domain scores (MD = 0.53, 95% CI: - 0.03 to 1.09) and environment domain scores (MD = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.00 to 1.11). Both the 6-min walk distance (MD = 34.09, 95% CI: 2.51 to 65.66) and maximum oxygen uptake (MD = 4.45, 95% CI: 3.32 to 5.58) significantly improved. However, improvements in asthma control questionnaire scores (MD = - 0.25, 95% CI: - 0.51 to 0.02) and asthma symptom-free days (MD = 3.35, 95% CI: - 0.21 to 6.90) were not significant. Moreover, there was no significant improvement (MD = 0.10, 95% CI: - 0.08 to 0.29) in forced expiratory volume in 1 s. Nonetheless, improvements in forced vital capacity (MD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.38) and peak expiratory flow (MD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.57) were significant.

conclusionsExercise-based PR may improve quality of life, exercise tolerance and some aspects of pulmonary function in adults with asthma and can be considered a supplementary therapy. RCTs of high quality and large sample sizes are required. CLINICAL

trial registrationThe review was registered with PROSPERO (The website is https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , and the ID is CRD42019147107).

Indexed as

AdultAsthmaBreathing ExercisesExercise TherapyExercise ToleranceHumansOxygen ConsumptionQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeAsthmaMeta-analysisPulmonary rehabilitationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33516207
PMCPMC7847170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.