Physical fitness training for stroke patients (Review) - Update Software
Physical fitness training for stroke patients (Review) - Update Software
Physical fitness training for stroke patients (Review) - Update Software
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Sims 2009 (Continued)<br />
unstable insulin dependent diabetes<br />
Interventions Intervention: participants in the intervention group attended a community gymnasium<br />
twice/week <strong>for</strong> 10 weeks and trained under the supervision of an accredited <strong>fitness</strong> trainer.<br />
The <strong>training</strong> programme entailed moderate strengthening exercises (3 sets of 8/10 repetitions<br />
at a resistance of 80% of 1-RM) using machine weights <strong>for</strong> the major upper and lower<br />
limb muscle groups. Resistence was increased when participants were able to complete 3<br />
sets of 10 repetitions of an exercise<br />
Control: the wait-list controls received usual care and were asked not to do any resistancetype<br />
exercise (content of the ’usual care’ intervention not specified)<br />
Setting: community-based setting<br />
Outcomes Included outcomes: CES-D; AQoL, SF-12<br />
Other outcomes: SIS; SWLS; LOT-R; Self-Esteem Scale; RLOC<br />
Notes Sample size calculation per<strong>for</strong>med but sample obtained was smaller than that of the calculation<br />
(45 participants instead of 60). Small sample size. At baseline the intervention<br />
group had significantly lower depression scores than the comparison group. Impact of social<br />
interaction was not assessed<br />
The participants in the control group received more attention than simply usual care as<br />
they received a 10-week strength assessment<br />
Risk of bias<br />
Bias Authors’ judgement Support <strong>for</strong> judgement<br />
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not reported<br />
Smith 2008<br />
Methods Design: randomised trial of cardiorespiratory <strong>training</strong> versus non-exercise intervention -<br />
after usual care (i.e. treadmill gait <strong>training</strong> versus weekly telephone calls - the main purpose<br />
of the trial was to explore the potential additional benefits of treadmill <strong>training</strong>)<br />
Randomisation: random matched-pair assignment. The investigator assigned a number to<br />
suitable participants and placed them in 1 of the intervention groups by ’the roll of a dice’<br />
(odd control, even treatment), or systematically allocated a participant to match a randomly<br />
assigned participant in the alternate group (minimisation?)<br />
Allocation concealment: unclear<br />
Blinding: clinical assessor not blinded<br />
Intention-to-treat: not reported, but no withdrawals<br />
Measurements: at the end of the intervention (4 weeks) and then 6 weeks later<br />
Withdrawals: none<br />
Participants Randomised: 20 participants; age range 42 to 72 years<br />
Intervention: 10 participants, 8 males and 2 females; mean age 57.8 years (SD 7.0); time<br />
from <strong>stroke</strong> : 8 participants < 1 year and 2 participants ≥ 1 year < 2 years<br />
Control: 10 participants, 4 males and 6 females; mean age 56 years (SD 8.3); time from<br />
<strong>stroke</strong> : 8 participants < 1 year and 2 participants ≥ 1 year < 2 years<br />
<strong>Physical</strong> <strong>fitness</strong> <strong>training</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>stroke</strong> <strong>patients</strong> (<strong>Review</strong>)<br />
Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.<br />
67