ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2025
Integrating an exercise program into opioid agonist therapy: a pilot study on feasibility, fitness improvements, and participation challenges.
Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT) face high risk of comorbidities, including cardiovascular and mental health disorders. Integrating exercise programs with OAT may reduce health disparities and improve well-being. This study explored the feasibility and preliminary effects of an integrated exercise program.
methodThis multicentre, mixed-methods pilot study was conducted in Western Norway, recruiting 22 participants receiving OAT from three outpatient clinics. The six-week, group-based exercise program focused on high-intensity endurance and strength training. Changes in aerobic fitness (4-minut step test), psychological distress (10-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist, SCL-10), fatigue (3-items Fatigue Severity Scale, FSS-3), lung function (spirometry), and respiratory symptoms (modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale, mMRC) were assessed, while qualitative interviews provided insights into intervention feasibility.
resultsPre- and post-test assessments indicated improvements in aerobic fitness, as measured by the 4-minute step test, with a pre-test mean of 89.4 (SD: 24.7) and a post-test mean of 103.1 (SD: 31.3) step-cycles, despite a modest attendance rate of 28%. Psychological distress, evaluated using the SCL-10, increased in score from 1.85 (SD: 0.66) to 2.03 (SD: 0.59). Fatigue also increased slightly Fss-3: 4.44 (SD:2.38) to 5.07 (SD:2.01), while respiratory symptoms using mMRC, lung capacity with FVC, and expiratory volume FEV1 remained stable. Qualitative findings were categorized into three main themes: (1) The clinic as an arena for physical activity, (2) a modest move with a substantial benefit for participants, (3) challenges and adjustments to the intervention. Participants reported that exercising in connection with the OAT clinic promoted a sense of care and support from clinicians. Many experienced increased self-confidence and social engagement, though attendance was affected by health issues, fluctuating motivation, and logistical challenges.
conclusionThis pilot study suggests that integrating structured exercise into OAT can be feasible and improve aerobic fitness. However, increased psychological distress and fatigue might indicate the need for additional support. The low attendance rate highlights engagement challenges, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies to enhance participation. Future research should focus on optimizing intervention design to improve attendance and enhance physical and psychological outcomes for individuals in OAT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.