The aim of our meta-analysis was to compile the available evidence to evaluate the effect of physical exercise-based therapy (PEBT) on pain, impact of the disease, quality of life (QoL) and anxiety in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), to determine the effect of different modes of physical exercise-based therapy, and the most effective dose of physical exercise-based therapy for improving each outcome. A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out. The PubMed (MEDLINE), SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases were searched up to November 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of physical exercise-based therapy and other treatments on pain, the impact of the disease, QoL and/or anxiety in patients with FMS were included. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and a 95% CI were estimated for all the outcome measures using random effect models. Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. Sixty-eight RCTs involving 5,474 participants were included. Selection, detection and performance biases were the most identified. In comparison to other therapies, at immediate assessment, physical exercise-based therapy was effective at improving pain [SMD-0.62 (95%CI, -0.78 to -0.46)], the impact of the disease [SMD-0.52 (95%CI, -0.67 to -0.36)], the physical [SMD 0.51 (95%CI, 0.33 to 0.69)] and mental dimensions of QoL [SMD 0.48 (95%CI, 0.29 to 0.67)], and the anxiety [SMD-0.36 (95%CI, -0.49 to -0.25)]. The most effective dose of physical exercise-based therapy for reducing pain was 21-40 sessions [SMD-0.83 (95%CI, 1.1--0.56)], 3 sessions/week [SMD-0.82 (95%CI, -1.2--0.48)] and 61-90 min per session [SMD-1.08 (95%CI, -1.55--0.62)]. The effect of PEBT on pain reduction was maintained up to 12 weeks [SMD-0.74 (95%CI, -1.03--0.45)]. Among patients with FMS, PEBT (including circuit-based exercises or exercise movement techniques) is effective at reducing pain, the impact of the disease and anxiety as well as increasing QoL. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021232013.
Objectives. This systematic review aims to summarize the existing literature on Tai Chi randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and recommend Tai Chi exercise prescriptions for different diseases and populations. Methods. A systematic search for Tai Chi RCTs was conducted in five electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, and Web of Science) from their inception to December 2019. SPSS 20.0 software and Microsoft Excel 2019 were used to analyze the data, and the risk of bias tool in the RevMan 5.3.5 software was used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs. Results. A total of 139 articles were identified, including diseased populations (95, 68.3%) and healthy populations (44, 31.7%). The diseased populations included the following 10 disease types: musculoskeletal system or connective tissue diseases (34.7%), circulatory system diseases (23.2%), mental and behavioral disorders (12.6%), nervous system diseases (11.6%), respiratory system diseases (6.3%), endocrine, nutritional or metabolic diseases (5.3%), neoplasms (3.2%), injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes (1.1%), genitourinary system diseases (1.1%), and diseases of the eye and adnexa (1.1%). Tai Chi exercise prescription was generally classified as moderate intensity. The most commonly applied Tai Chi style was Yang style (92, 66.2%), and the most frequently specified Tai Chi form was simplified 24-form Tai Chi (43, 30.9%). 12 weeks and 24 weeks, 2-3 times a week, and 60 min each time was the most commonly used cycle, frequency, and time of exercise in Tai Chi exercise prescriptions. Conclusions. We recommend the more commonly used Tai Chi exercise prescriptions for different diseases and populations based on clinical evidence of Tai Chi. Further clinical research on Tai Chi should be combined with principles of exercise prescription to conduct large-sample epidemiological studies and long-term prospective follow-up studies to provide more substantive clinical evidence for Tai Chi exercise prescriptions.
Complementary medicine therapies are frequently used to treat pain conditions such as headaches and neck, back, and joint pain. Chronic pain, described as pain lasting longer than 3-6 months, can be a debilitating condition that has a significant socioeconomic impact. Pharmacologic approaches are often used for alleviating chronic pain, but recently there has been a reluctance to prescribe opioids for chronic noncancer pain because of concerns about tolerance, dependence, and addiction. As a result, there has been increased interest in integrative medicine strategies to help manage pain and to reduce reliance on prescription opioids to manage pain. This article offers a brief critical review of integrative medical therapies used to treat chronic pain, including nutritional supplements, yoga, relaxation, tai chi, massage, spinal manipulation, and acupuncture. The goal of this article is to identify those treatments that show evidence of efficacy and to identify gaps in the literature where additional studies and controlled trials are needed. An electronic search of the databases of PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Science Citation Index Expanded was conducted. Overall, weak positive evidence was found for yoga, relaxation, tai chi, massage, and manipulation. Strong evidence for acupuncture as a complementary treatment for chronic pain that has been shown to decrease the usage of opioids was found. Few studies were found in which integrative medicine approaches were used to address opioid misuse and abuse among chronic pain patients. Additional controlled trials to address the use of integrative medicine approaches in pain management are needed.
Several studies reported that Tai Chi showed potential effects for chronic pain, but its role remains controversial. This review assessed the evidence regarding the effects of Tai Chi for chronic pain conditions. 18 randomized controlled trials were included in our review. The aggregated results have indicated that Tai Chi showed positive evidence on immediate relief of chronic pain from osteoarthritis (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.54; 95% confidence intervals [CI], -0.77 to -0.30; P < 0.05). The valid duration of Tai Chi practice for osteoarthritis may be more than 5 weeks. And there were some beneficial evidences regarding the effects of Tai Chi on immediate relief of chronic pain from low back pain (SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.11 to -0.52; P < 0.05) and osteoporosis (SMD, -0.83; 95% CI, -1.37 to -0.28; P = 0.003). Therefore, clinicians may consider Tai Chi as a viable complementary and alternative medicine for chronic pain conditions.
The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and assess evidence related to the efficacy of meditative movement (MM) on sleep quality. We conducted a comprehensive review of relevant studies drawn from English and Chinese databases. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting outcomes of the effects of MM (tai chi, qi gong, and yoga) on sleep quality were taken into consideration. Twenty-seven RCTs fulfilled our inclusion criteria and formed the basis for this review. Due to clinical heterogeneity, no meta-analysis was performed. Seventeen studies received a Jadad score of ≥ 3 and were considered high-quality studies. Findings of the 17 studies showed that MM has beneficial effects for various populations on a range of sleep measures. Improvement in sleep quality was reported in the majority of studies and was often accompanied by improvements in quality of life, physical performance, and depression. However, studies to date generally have significant methodological limitations. Additional RCTs with rigorous research designs focusing on sleep quality or insomnia and testing specific hypotheses are needed to clearly establish the efficacy of MM in improving sleep quality and its potential use as an intervention for various populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
BACKGROUND: Mind-body interventions are based on the holistic principle that mind, body and behaviour are all interconnected. Mind-body interventions incorporate strategies that are thought to improve psychological and physical well-being, aim to allow patients to take an active role in their treatment, and promote people's ability to cope. Mind-body interventions are widely used by people with fibromyalgia to help manage their symptoms and improve well-being. Examples of mind-body therapies include psychological therapies, biofeedback, mindfulness, movement therapies and relaxation strategies.
OBJECTIVES: To review the benefits and harms of mind-body therapies in comparison to standard care and attention placebo control groups for adults with fibromyalgia, post-intervention and at three and six month follow-up.
SEARCH METHODS: Electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), AMED (EBSCO) and CINAHL (Ovid) were conducted up to 30 October 2013. Searches of reference lists were conducted and authors in the field were contacted to identify additional relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of mind-body interventions for adults with fibromyalgia were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted the data and assessed trials for low, unclear or high risk of bias. Any discrepancy was resolved through discussion and consensus. Continuous outcomes were analysed using mean difference (MD) where the same outcome measure and scoring method was used and standardised mean difference (SMD) where different outcome measures were used. For binary data standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) was used.
MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-four papers describing 61 trials were identified, with 4234 predominantly female participants. The nature of fibromyalgia varied from mild to severe across the study populations. Twenty-six studies were classified as having a low risk of bias for all domains assessed. The findings of mind-body therapies compared with usual care were prioritised.There is low quality evidence that in comparison to usual care controls psychological therapies have favourable effects on physical functioning (SMD -0.4, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.3, -7.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), pain (SMD -0.3, 95% CI -0.5 to -0.2, -3.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale) and mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.3, -4.8% absolute change, 3 point shift on a 20 to 80 scale). There is very low quality evidence of more withdrawals in the psychological therapy group in comparison to usual care controls (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.69, 6% absolute risk difference). There is lack of evidence of a difference between the number of adverse events in the psychological therapy and control groups (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.50, 4% absolute risk difference).There was very low quality evidence that biofeedback in comparison to usual care controls had an effect on physical functioning (SMD -0.1, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.3, -1.2% absolute change, 1 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), pain (SMD -2.6, 95% CI -91.3 to 86.1, -2.6% absolute change) and mood (SMD 0.1, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.5, 1.9% absolute change, less than 1 point shift on a 0 to 90 scale) post-intervention. In view of the quality of evidence we cannot be certain that biofeedback has a little or no effect on these outcomes. There was very low quality evidence that biofeedback led to more withdrawals from the study (RR 4.08, 95% CI 1.43 to 11.62, 20% absolute risk difference). No adverse events were reported.There was no advantage observed for mindfulness in comparison to usual care for physical functioning (SMD -0.3, 95% CI -0.6 to 0.1, -4.8% absolute change, 4 point shift on a scale 0 to 100), pain (SMD -0.1, CI -0.4 to 0.3, -1.3% absolute change, less than 1 point shift on a 0 to 10 scale), mood (SMD -0.2, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.0, -3.7% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 20 to 80 scale) or withdrawals (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.72, 2% absolute risk difference) between the two groups post-intervention. However, the quality of the evidence was very low for pain and moderate for mood and number of withdrawals. No studies reported any adverse events.Very low quality evidence revealed that movement therapies in comparison to usual care controls improved pain (MD -2.3, CI -4.2 to -0.4, -23% absolute change) and mood (MD -9.8, 95% CI -18.5 to -1.2, -16.4% absolute change) post-intervention. There was no advantage for physical functioning (SMD -0.2, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.2, -3.4% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 100 scale), participant withdrawals (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.38, 11% absolute difference) or adverse events (RR 4.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 93.92, 4% absolute risk difference) between the two groups, however rare adverse events may include worsening of pain.Low quality evidence revealed that relaxation based therapies in comparison to usual care controls showed an advantage for physical functioning (MD -8.3, 95% CI -10.1 to -6.5, -10.4% absolute change) and pain (SMD -1.0, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.5, -3.5% absolute change, 2 point shift on a 0 to 78 scale) but not for mood (SMD -4.4, CI -14.5 to 5.6, -7.4% absolute change) post-intervention. There was no difference between the groups for number of withdrawals (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.59 to 33.07, 31% absolute risk difference) and no adverse events were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Psychological interventions therapies may be effective in improving physical functioning, pain and low mood for adults with fibromyalgia in comparison to usual care controls but the quality of the evidence is low. Further research on the outcomes of therapies is needed to determine if positive effects identified post-intervention are sustained. The effectiveness of biofeedback, mindfulness, movement therapies and relaxation based therapies remains unclear as the quality of the evidence was very low or low. The small number of trials and inconsistency in the use of outcome measures across the trials restricted the analysis.
The aim of this review was to determine what type of physical activity programmes have been developed in patients with fibromyalgia and what are its effects and benefits on the degree of pain and quality of life. The search was performed in MEDLINE, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus databases. The word "fibromyalgia" was always used as a criterion for combined search (using "AND" connector) with physical activity, exercise, physical therapy and training (MeSH terms). Of the 2,531 initial results, 33 papers were selected for review. The studies reviewed focus primarily on dance activities, water activities, multidisciplinary, mind-body work, fitness and stretching. After applying the intervention program, the pain level was reduced between 10 and 44.2%, and the impact of the disease between 5.3 and 17.9%, improving the symptoms of these patients. In conclusion, a multidisciplinary programme (in which physical activity is included) may have positive effects on the quality of life of people with fibromyalgia.
Complementary and alternative medicine includes a number of exercise modalities, such as tai chi, qigong, yoga, and a variety of lesser-known movement therapies. A meta-analysis of the current literature was conducted estimating the effect size of the different modalities, study quality and bias, and adverse events. The level of research has been moderately weak to date, but most studies report a medium-to-high effect size in pain reduction. Given the lack of adverse events, there is little risk in recommending these modalities as a critical component in a multimodal treatment plan, which is often required for fibromyalgia management.
The aim of our meta-analysis was to compile the available evidence to evaluate the effect of physical exercise-based therapy (PEBT) on pain, impact of the disease, quality of life (QoL) and anxiety in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), to determine the effect of different modes of physical exercise-based therapy, and the most effective dose of physical exercise-based therapy for improving each outcome. A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out. The PubMed (MEDLINE), SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases were searched up to November 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of physical exercise-based therapy and other treatments on pain, the impact of the disease, QoL and/or anxiety in patients with FMS were included. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and a 95% CI were estimated for all the outcome measures using random effect models. Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. Sixty-eight RCTs involving 5,474 participants were included. Selection, detection and performance biases were the most identified. In comparison to other therapies, at immediate assessment, physical exercise-based therapy was effective at improving pain [SMD-0.62 (95%CI, -0.78 to -0.46)], the impact of the disease [SMD-0.52 (95%CI, -0.67 to -0.36)], the physical [SMD 0.51 (95%CI, 0.33 to 0.69)] and mental dimensions of QoL [SMD 0.48 (95%CI, 0.29 to 0.67)], and the anxiety [SMD-0.36 (95%CI, -0.49 to -0.25)]. The most effective dose of physical exercise-based therapy for reducing pain was 21-40 sessions [SMD-0.83 (95%CI, 1.1--0.56)], 3 sessions/week [SMD-0.82 (95%CI, -1.2--0.48)] and 61-90 min per session [SMD-1.08 (95%CI, -1.55--0.62)]. The effect of PEBT on pain reduction was maintained up to 12 weeks [SMD-0.74 (95%CI, -1.03--0.45)]. Among patients with FMS, PEBT (including circuit-based exercises or exercise movement techniques) is effective at reducing pain, the impact of the disease and anxiety as well as increasing QoL. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021232013.
Systematic Review Question»Systematic review of interventions
