Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Entrenamiento físico para la fibrosis quística

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768.pub4Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 01 noviembre 2017see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Fibrosis quística y enfermedades genéticas

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2017 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Thomas Radtke

    Correspondencia a: Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    [email protected]

  • Sarah J Nevitt

    Department of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

  • Helge Hebestreit

    Paediatric Departement, Julius‐Maximilians University, Würzburg, Germany

  • Susi Kriemler

    Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Contributions of authors

The title for the protocol was conceived by the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group.

Both Judy Bradley and Fidelma Moran designed and assisted in writing the protocol and produced the earlier versions of the full review. For updates from 2015, Thomas Radtke and Susi Kriemler were responsible for acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. Sarah Nolan provided statistical support for the 2015 update. All authors provided intellectual input, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final version of this updated review.

Thomas Radtke acts as guarantor for this review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • No sources of support supplied

External sources

  • National Institute for Health Research, UK.

    This systematic review was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group.

Declarations of interest

HH has received financial compensation for travel and accomodation or free meeting participation (or both) at the European Cystic Fibrosis Society conference and the North American Cystic Fibrosis Conference for chairing or presenting at sessions focusing on exercise in cystic fibrosis. For writing an educational booklet on exercise in cystic fibrosis, HH has received money from Novartis. HH is also the lead investigator on one of the studies included in the review (Hebestreit 2010). As he is the lead investigator of the international multicentre trial ACTIVATE‐CF (Hebestreit 2016), his institution has received grants from the Mukoviszidose e.V. and a Vertex Innovation Award.

TR belongs to the core study team of the ACTIVATE‐CF trial (Hebestreit 2016). TR has also received financial compensation for chairing and presenting at exercise sessions at the European Cystic Fibrosis Society conference. He has also received financial support (travel, accomodation) from Vifor Pharma Switzerland to participate at the European Cystic Fibrosis Society and European Respiratory Society conference.

SK is the lead investigator on one of the studies included in the review (Kriemler 2013) and also belongs to the core study team of the ACTIVATE‐CF trial (Hebestreit 2016)

SJN declares no known potential conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr Judy Bradley and Dr Fidelma Moran, who have stepped down at the 2015 update, for their previous contributions to the review which are detailed below.

We would like to kindly thank Nikki Jahnke from the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetics Disorders Group for her guidance and support during the process of writing this review.

This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2022 Aug 09

Physical activity and exercise training in cystic fibrosis

Review

Thomas Radtke, Sherie Smith, Sarah J Nevitt, Helge Hebestreit, Susi Kriemler

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768.pub5

2017 Nov 01

Physical exercise training for cystic fibrosis

Review

Thomas Radtke, Sarah J Nevitt, Helge Hebestreit, Susi Kriemler

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768.pub4

2015 Jun 28

Physical exercise training for cystic fibrosis

Review

Thomas Radtke, Sarah J Nolan, Helge Hebestreit, Susi Kriemler

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768.pub3

2008 Jan 23

Physical training for cystic fibrosis

Review

Judy M Bradley, Fidelma Moran

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768.pub2

2002 Apr 22

Physical training for cystic fibrosis

Review

Judy M Bradley, Fidelma Moran

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002768

Differences between protocol and review

Post hoc changes for the 2017 update

Summary of findings tables have been added in line with Cochrane guidance.

It was stipulated that the duration of each included study duration should be at least two weeks, which is the typical length of (drug) treatment for pulmonary exacerbations where people with CF may also take part in in‐hospital exercise training. Moreover, from an exercise physiology perspective, less than two weeks of structured exercise are unlikely to elicit meaningful changes in the chosen outcomes measures.

We added the lung clearance index (LCI) derived from multiple‐breath washout to secondary outcomes "4. Additional indices of pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength". The LCI is a relatively new and much examined pulmonary function outcome measure and included in many clinical studies including exercise training interventions.

We also added the diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) and the diffusing capacity for nitric oxide (DLNO) to secondary outcomes "4. Additional indices of pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength". Non‐invasive measurement of the pulmonary diffusing capacity can provide novel physiological insights into the exercise training effects on pulmonary function beyond the much examined FEV1, derived from spirometry.

Post hoc changes for the 2015 update

The title of the review has been changed from 'Physical training for cystic fibrosis' to 'Physical exercise training for cystic fibrosis' as the new team felt this better reflected the content of the review.

The fourth primary outcome 'mortality' was moved to secondary outcomes in line with Cochrane guidance to limit the number of primary outcomes to three. For this update, primary and secondary outcome measures were changed as follows:

Primary outcomes

We limited the primary outcome measures to:

  1. Exercise capacity by peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak)

  2. Pulmonary function by forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)

  3. Health‐related quality of life (HRQoL).

In CF, VO2 peak and FEV1 are strong predictors of mortality, objectively measurable and are often used as primary outcomes in studies of physical exercise training. The outcome measure HRQoL is important participant‐reported outcome measure and is related to physical fitness in people with CF. None of the other primary outcomes from previous reviews has been shown to be of predictive value in CF and they should be considered explorative endpoints. All previous primary outcomes for pulmonary function are now integrated under the secondary outcome number 4 "Additional indices of pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength" and exercise capacity variables including effort, oxygenation and fatigue are integrated into the secondary outcome number 3 " Additional indices of exercise capacity".

Secondary outcomes
We removed the secondary outcomes "Symptom scores", "Compliance with other treatment, such as chest physiotherapy, nutritional regimens" and "Cost evaluation". These outcomes are of unclear relevance, difficult to measure reliably and are rarely reported in physical training studies. We added the secondary outcome "Physical activity" because it is an important outcome in exercise training studies. The outcome "Measures of bone mineral density and diabetic control" was separated into "Bone health" and "Diabetic control" because these outcomes are unrelated and should be studied and reported separately. The outcome "Weight" was removed as a separate outcome and is now integrated within the outcome "Body composition" which comprises all measures of nutrition including body weight, body fat and fat‐free mass. The secondary outcome "Number of acute exacerbations, intravenous antibiotic courses and time off work or school" was separated as "Acute exacerbations (a) number of exacerbations; (b) time to first exacerbation" and "Antibiotic use (including oral, intravenous or inhaled antibiotics)".

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgments about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgments about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgments about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgments about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1(% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1(% predicted).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Change in health‐related quality of life.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Change in health‐related quality of life.

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in strength (Newton metres).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in strength (Newton metres).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Annual rate of change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise over 36 month (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Annual rate of change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise over 36 month (%).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in treadmill speed (km/h).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in treadmill speed (km/h).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in treadmill exercise time (min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in treadmill exercise time (min).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in heart rate (beats per min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in heart rate (beats per min).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in oxygen saturation (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in oxygen saturation (%).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Annual rate of change in peak VE over 36 months (L/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Annual rate of change in peak VE over 36 months (L/min).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in FVC (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in FVC (% predicted).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in FEF25‐75 (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in FEF25‐75 (% predicted).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in RV/TLC (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in RV/TLC (%).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in FEV1/FVC (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in FEV1/FVC (% predicted).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in total physical activity (counts per min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in total physical activity (counts per min).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity (hours per week).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity (hours per week).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in total physical activity (MJ/day).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.19

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in total physical activity (MJ/day).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Change in body weight (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.20

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Change in body weight (kg).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Change in BMI (kg/m2).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Change in BMI (kg/m2).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 22 Change in BMI z score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.22

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 22 Change in BMI z score.

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 23 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 23 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 24 Change in body fat (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.24

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 24 Change in body fat (%).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 25 Annual rate of change of ideal weight for height (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.25

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 25 Annual rate of change of ideal weight for height (%).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 26 Change in triceps skinfold thickness (mm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.26

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 26 Change in triceps skinfold thickness (mm).

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 27 Change in arm muscle circumference (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.27

Comparison 1 Aerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 27 Change in arm muscle circumference (cm).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Change in HRQoL.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Change in HRQoL.

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in HRQoL physical function (CF questionnaire).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in HRQoL physical function (CF questionnaire).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in peak power during WAnT (W).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in peak power during WAnT (W).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in mean power during WAnT (W).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in mean power during WAnT (W).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in lower limb strength (Newton metres).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in lower limb strength (Newton metres).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg body weight).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg body weight).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in lactate during maximal exercise (mmol/L).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.11

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in lactate during maximal exercise (mmol/L).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Change in peak oxygen saturation during maximal exercise (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.12

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Change in peak oxygen saturation during maximal exercise (%).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in FVC (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.13

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in FVC (% predicted).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in RV/TLC (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.14

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in RV/TLC (%).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in total physical activity (counts per min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.15

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in total physical activity (counts per min).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in moderate to vigorous physical activity (hours per week).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.16

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in moderate to vigorous physical activity (hours per week).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in physical activity (MJ/day).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.17

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in physical activity (MJ/day).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in weight (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.18

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in weight (kg).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in BMI (kg/m2).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.19

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in BMI (kg/m2).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.20

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Change in body fat (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.21

Comparison 2 Anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Change in body fat (%).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Annual change in FEV1 (mL).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 3 Annual change in FEV1 (mL).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in subjective health perception (CFQ‐R).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 4 Change in subjective health perception (CFQ‐R).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in Quality of Life: CFQ‐R.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 5 Change in Quality of Life: CFQ‐R.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in peak power during WAnT (W per kg body weight).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 6 Change in peak power during WAnT (W per kg body weight).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg body weight).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg body weight).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in muscle strength (all limbs) (1RM test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 8 Change in muscle strength (all limbs) (1RM test).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in muscular strength ‐ leg press (kg; 1 RM test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 9 Change in muscular strength ‐ leg press (kg; 1 RM test).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Chest press (kg; 1 RM test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 10 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Chest press (kg; 1 RM test).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Latpull down (kg; 1 RM test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 11 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Latpull down (kg; 1 RM test).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Biceps curl (kg; RM test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 12 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Biceps curl (kg; RM test).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of push ups.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.13

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 13 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of push ups.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of sit ups.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.14

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 14 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of sit ups.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Flexibility (cm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.15

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 15 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Flexibility (cm).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ hand grip strength (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.16

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 16 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ hand grip strength (kg).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.17

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 17 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in functional exercise capacity.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.18

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 18 Change in functional exercise capacity.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in peak heart rate during 6MWT (beats/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.19

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 19 Change in peak heart rate during 6MWT (beats/min).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Annual change in peak heart rate (beat/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.20

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 20 Annual change in peak heart rate (beat/min).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Annual change in VE (L/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.21

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 21 Annual change in VE (L/min).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 22 Change in peak ventilation (VE) during maximal exercise.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.22

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 22 Change in peak ventilation (VE) during maximal exercise.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 23 Annual change in lactate (mmol/l).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.23

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 23 Annual change in lactate (mmol/l).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 24 Change in RR during 6MWT (breaths/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.24

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 24 Change in RR during 6MWT (breaths/min).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 25 Annual change in RR (breaths/min).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.25

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 25 Annual change in RR (breaths/min).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 26 Annual change in RER.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.26

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 26 Annual change in RER.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 27 Change in oxygen saturation (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.27

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 27 Change in oxygen saturation (%).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 28 Change in Borg breathlessness score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.28

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 28 Change in Borg breathlessness score.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 29 Annual change in Borg breathlessness score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.29

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 29 Annual change in Borg breathlessness score.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 30 Change in Borg fatigue score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.30

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 30 Change in Borg fatigue score.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 31 Annual change in Borg muscle effort.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.31

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 31 Annual change in Borg muscle effort.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 32 Change in FVC (% predicted).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.32

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 32 Change in FVC (% predicted).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 33 Annual change in FVC (mL).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.33

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 33 Annual change in FVC (mL).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 34 Change in RV/TLC (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.34

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 34 Change in RV/TLC (%).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 35 Change in Total Energy Expenditure (k/cal).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.35

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 35 Change in Total Energy Expenditure (k/cal).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 36 Change in the Number of Steps.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.36

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 36 Change in the Number of Steps.

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 37 Change in Physical Activity (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.37

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 37 Change in Physical Activity (%).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 38 Change in vigorous physical activity (hours per week).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.38

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 38 Change in vigorous physical activity (hours per week).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 39 Change in body weight (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.39

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 39 Change in body weight (kg).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 40 Change in BMI (kg/m2).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.40

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 40 Change in BMI (kg/m2).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 41 Change in sum of four skinfolds (mm).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.41

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 41 Change in sum of four skinfolds (mm).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 42 Change in body fat (%).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.42

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 42 Change in body fat (%).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 43 Change in fat‐mass (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.43

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 43 Change in fat‐mass (kg).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 44 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.44

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 44 Change in fat‐free mass (kg).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 45 Change in metabolic parameters (HbA1c (%)).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.45

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 45 Change in metabolic parameters (HbA1c (%)).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 46 Change in metabolic parameters (Glucose AUC).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.46

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 46 Change in metabolic parameters (Glucose AUC).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 47 Change in metabolic parameters (Total Insulin AUC).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.47

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 47 Change in metabolic parameters (Total Insulin AUC).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 48 Change in metabolic parameters (Insulin Sensitivity Index).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.48

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 48 Change in metabolic parameters (Insulin Sensitivity Index).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 49 Change in Plasma Glucose (mmol/L).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.49

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 49 Change in Plasma Glucose (mmol/L).

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 50 Change in Plasma Insulin (µU/mL).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.50

Comparison 3 Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training, Outcome 50 Change in Plasma Insulin (µU/mL).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Summary of findings ‐ Aerobic training versus no physical training

Aerobic training compared with no physical training for cystic fibrosis

Patient or population: adults and children with cystic fibrosis

Settings: Outpatients

Intervention: Aerobic training

Comparison: No physical training

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

No physical training

Aerobic training

Exercise capacity: change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (mL/min per kg body weight)

Follow‐up: from hospital discharge up to 3 years

Short‐term improvements in exercise tolerance during aerobic training were significantly greater than with no physical training at hospital discharge and 1 month after hospital discharge.

One study showed no difference between groups at 3 months and 1 study showed a significant improvement in exercise tolerance following aerobic training at 6 months compared to no physical training.

No significant longer‐term differences between groups were observed.

NA

170

(4 studies)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Pulmonary function: change in FEV1 (% predicted)

Follow‐up: from hospital discharge up to 3 years

There were no short‐term differences between groups at hospital discharge or one month after hospital discharge.

Two studies showed a significant improvement in pulmonary function during and following aerobic training at 3 months, 6 months and 18 months post‐training compared to no physical training.

However, 1 study showed no significant differences in annual change of pulmonary function between groups were observed over 36 months.

NA

187

(5 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

HRQoL: CFQ Quality of Well‐being Scale and perceived 'positive effects.'

Follow‐up: one month after hospital discharge up to three years

No significant differences between the groups were shown according to the CFQ.

A significant improvement in HRQoL according to the Quality of Well‐being Scale was observed in the aerobic exercise group compared to the no physical training group at 1 month after hospital discharge, MD 0.10 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.17).

Positive effects were reported by 43 out of 49 participants (not reported by treatment group).

NA

143

(3 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,4

CF‐related mortality

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Pulmonary exacerbations: number of hospitalisations and number of days in hospital

Follow‐up: up to three years

There were no between‐group differences reported for the mean number of hospitalisations or mean number of days in hospital at year 1, 2 and 3.

NA

65

(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,5

Diabetic control

Follow‐up:NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Adverse events

Follow‐up: up to two years

One study reported that no adverse effects occurred. In the other study, 1 participant in the aerobic training group injured her ankle and missed 2 days of aerobic training. One participant from the control group developed haemoptysis and withdrew from the study.

NA

71

(2 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CFQ: Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire; CI: confidence interval; FEV1 : forced expiratory volume in 1 second; HRQoL: health‐related quality of life;MD: mean difference; NA: not applicable; VO2 peak: peak oxygen consumption.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.

1. Downgraded once due to risk of bias: Methodological details of the studies relating to randomisation and allocation concealment were unclear; one study used an inadequate method of randomisation and allocation concealment which may have introduced bias.
2. Downgraded once due to applicability: the no physical training group of one study deteriorated more than expected, this should be taken into account when interpreting results.
3. Downgraded once due to applicability: in one study, the method of measuring VO2 was not validated and likely underestimates the true VO2 peak of the study participants.
4. Downgraded once due to imprecision and applicability: very limited numerical data reported and unclear if the measures and questionnaires used were validated in this population.
5. Downgraded once due to imprecision: very limited numerical data reported.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Summary of findings ‐ Aerobic training versus no physical training
Summary of findings 2. Summary of findings ‐ Anaerobic training versus no physical training

Anaerobic training compared with no physical training for cystic fibrosis

Patient or population: adults and children with cystic fibrosis

Settings: outpatients

Intervention: anaerobic training

Comparison: no physical training

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

No physical training

Anaerobic training

Exercise capacity: change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (mL/min per kg BW)

Follow‐up: from hospital discharge up to 3 years

One study showed a significant improvement in exercise capacity following anaerobic training at 6 months compared to no physical training.

No significant differences between groups were observed at any other time points.

NA

86

(3 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

Pulmonary function: change in FEV1 (% predicted)

Follow‐up: from hospital discharge up to 3 years

Two studies showed a significant improvement in pulmonary function during and following anaerobic training at hospital discharge, 1 month after discharge, 3 months, 6 months and 18 months post‐training compared to no physical training.

The second study showed no significant differences in lung function at any time point.

NA

86

(3 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

HRQoL: Quality of Well‐being Scale or HRQoL scale physical function

Follow‐up: up to 2 years

No significant differences between groups were observed according to the Quality of Well‐being Scale or HRQoL scale physical function.

NA

64

(2 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,3

CF‐related mortality

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Pulmonary exacerbations

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Diabetic control

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Adverse events

Follow‐up: 2 years

One study reported that no adverse effects occurred.

NA

22

(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; FEV1 : forced expiratory volume in 1 second; HRQoL: health‐related quality of life; NA: not applicable; VO2 peak: peak oxygen consumption.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.

1. Downgraded once due to risk of bias: methodological details of the studies relating to randomisation and allocation concealment were unclear; one study used an inadequate method of randomisation and allocation concealment which may have introduced bias.
2. Downgraded once due to applicability: the no physical training group of one study deteriorated more than expected, this should be taken into account when interpreting results.
3. Downgraded once due to applicability: unclear if the measures and questionnaires used were validated in this population.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 2. Summary of findings ‐ Anaerobic training versus no physical training
Summary of findings 3. Summary of findings ‐ Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no training

Combined aerobic and anaerobic training compared with no physical training for cystic fibrosis

Patient or population: adults and children with cystic fibrosis

Settings: outpatients

Intervention: combined aerobic and anaerobic training

Comparison: no physical training

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

No physical training

Combined aerobic and anaerobic training

Exercise capacity: change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (mL/min per kg body weight)

Follow‐up: 12 weeks to two years

A significantly higher VO2 peak was found in the combined training compared to the no physical training group after 12 to 18 months in 1 study.

No significant difference between groups was found at any other time point.

NA

52

(2 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

Two additional studies recruiting 42 participants showed significant group x time interactions for VO2 peak; however, these results are not included in this review due to concerns over inconsistencies in the data provided to us by the original trial authors.

Pulmonary function: change in FEV1 (% predicted) or mL

Follow‐up: 12 weeks to two years

No significant differences in pulmonary function were observed between treatment groups at any time point.

NA

103

(3 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

HRQoL: CFQ,

Medical Outcomes Study‐36 Item Short‐Form Health Survey, SF‐36

Follow‐up: 12 weeks to 2 years

Two studies showed no significant differences in any HRQoL scale.

One study showed a significant improvement in subjective health perception in the combined training group after 3 to 6 months and after 12 to 18 months (but not between 6 and 12 months).

NA

93

(3 studies)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

CF‐related mortality

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Pulmonary exacerbations

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

Diabetic control

Follow‐up: 12 weeks

Significant differences in some of the parameters were observed in the no physical training group compared to the combined training group and vice versa.

Also no significant differences were observed for some parameters.

NA

14

(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

The study reported a range of metabolic parameters (HbA1c(%), Glucose AUC, Total Insulin AUC, Insulin Sensitivity Index) Plasma Glucose and Plasma Insulin.

Adverse events

Follow‐up: NA

Outcome not reported.

NA

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
AUC: area under the curve; CFQ: Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire; CI: confidence interval; FEV1 : forced expiratory volume in 1 second; HRQoL: health‐related quality of life; NA: not applicable; VO2 peak: peak oxygen consumption.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.

1. Downgraded once due to risk of bias: methodological details of the studies relating to randomisation and allocation concealment were unclear; one study used an inadequate method of randomisation and allocation concealment which may have introduced bias.
2. Downgraded once due to risk of bias: one study had many methodological inadequacies including early termination and low statistical power. These inadequacies are likely to have impacted on results.
3. Downgraded once due to imprecision: wide CIs around effect estimates due to small numbers of participants analysed.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 3. Summary of findings ‐ Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no training
Table 1. Study results for Santana‐Sosa 2012

Variable

Group

Pre‐training

Post‐training

Detraining

P value (group x time)

Comments

Age (mean (SE)) years

Intervention

11 (3)

Control

10 (2)

Sex (% boys)

Intervention

55

Control

64

VO2 peak (mean (95% CI)) ml/min per kg body weight

Intervention

n.a.

3.9 (1.8 to 6.1)

‐3.4 (‐5.7 to 1.7)

0.036

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.023).

Data were presented in a figure in the original publication.

Control

n.a.

‐2.2 (‐5.3 to 0.1)

‐0.7 (‐4.4 to 5.9)

Leg press (mean (95% CI)) kg

Intervention

n.a.

24.9 (14.3 to 34.4)

‐1.0 (‐4.1 to 3.3)

< 0.001

Data are reported in a figure in the original publication.

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.014).

Control

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Bench press (mean (95% CI)) kg

Intervention

n.a.

10.5 (7.0 to 14.0)

‐1.2 (‐3.6 to 3.0)

< 0.001

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.007).

Data presented in a figure in the original publication.

Control

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Seated row (mean (95% CI)) kg

Intervention

n.a.

12.7 (9.2 to 16.0)

‐0.2 (‐3.6 to 3.2)

< 0.001

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.009).

Data presented in a figure in the original publication.

Control

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Oxygen saturation at peak exercise (mean (SE))

Intervention

94.9 (0.9)%

95.6 (0.8)%

94.5 (1.2)%

n.a.

Control

95.7 (0.5)%

96.4 (0.4)%

96.1 (0.5)%

FEV1 (mean (SE)) litres

Intervention

1.87 (0.24)

1.94 (0.23)

1.90 (0.25)

0.769

Control

1.77 (0.17)

1.87 (0.15)

1.79 (0.19)

FVC (mean (SE)) litres

Intervention

2.41 (0.24)

2.49 (0.25)

2.56 (0.29)

0.920

Control

2.29 (0.19)

2.36 (0.20)

2.40 (0.24)

PImax (mean (SE)) cm H2O

Intervention

64.0 (5.5)

69.8 (6.8)

75.2 (6.2)

0.797

Control

61.5 (6.9)

72.2 (7.2)

76.4 (7.5)

HRQoL score ‐ children's report (median (range))

Intervention

696 (495 ‐ 741)

719 (550 ‐ 734)

0.257

HRQoL was assessed before and after the intervention.

P value for comparison pre versus post‐training.

Control

649 (578 ‐ 768)

638 (461 ‐ 791)

HRQoL score ‐ parents' report (median (range))

Intervention

896 (688‐1011)

889 (811 ‐ 973)

0.143

HRQoL was assessed before and after the intervention.

Control

911 (842 ‐ 1028)

978 (684 ‐ 1059)

Weight (mean (SE)) kg

Intervention

39.9 (3.5)

40.5 (3.4)

41.4 (3.4)

0.723

Control

34.0 (2.6)

35.1 (2.8)

36.2 (3.0)

BMI (mean (SE)) kg/m²

Intervention

18.4 (1.0)

18.3 (0.7)

18.5 (0.7)

0.959

Control

17.2 (0.8)

17.1 (0.8)

17.4 (0.9)

Fat‐free mass (mean (SE)) %

Intervention

78.1 (2.7)

79.4 (2.8)

78.8 (2.9)

0.115

Control

81.1 (2.5)

80.9 (2.1)

81.1 (2.2)

Body fat (mean (SE)) %

Intervention

21.9 (2.7)

20.6 (2.8)

21.2 (2.9)

0.115

Control

18.9 (2.5)

19.1 (2.1)

18.9 (2.2)

Compliance with physical training (mean (SE)) %

Intervention

95.1 (7.4)

73% of children completed all training sessions.

Control

Adverse effects

Intervention

No adverse effects occurred during training or maximal exercise testing.

Control

BMI: body mass index
CI: confidence interval
FEV1: forced expiratory volume in one second
FVC: forced vital capacity
HRQoL: health‐related quality of life
n.a.: not applicable
PImax: maximum inspiratory mouth pressure
SE: standard error
VO2 peak: peak oxygen consumption

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Study results for Santana‐Sosa 2012
Table 2. Study results for Santana‐Sosa 2014

Variable

Group

Pre‐training

Post‐training

Detraining

P value (group x time)

Comments

Age (mean (SE)) years

Intervention

11 (1)

Control

10 (1)

Sex (% boys)

Intervention

60

Control

60

VO2 peak (mean (95% CI) ml/min per kg body weight

Intervention

n.a.

6.9 (3.4 to 10.5)

‐1.5 (‐2.7 to ‐0.4)

< 0.001

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.034).

Control

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Leg press (mean (SE)) kg

Intervention

62.5 (6.5)

89.5 (9.3)

88.6 (9.2)

< 0.001

Significantly higher in controls at baseline (P = 0.046).

Control

45.2 (4.7)

43.9 (5.1)

43.9 (5.4)

Bench press (mean (SE)) kg

Intervention

26.4 (2.7)

38.4 (3.2)

35.9 (2.9)

< 0.001

Control

23.2 (2.9)

21.6 (3.2)

21.7 (3.6)

Lateral row (mean (SE)) kg

Intervention

30.5 (3.6)

43.0 (4.2)

35.9 (2.9)

< 0.001

Control

23.2 (3.0)

22.0 (3.1)

21.7 (3.6)

Oxygen saturation at peak exercise (mean (SE)) %

Intervention

94.7 (0.7)

94.5 (0.7)

93.1 (0.8)

n.a.

Control

96.4 (0.4)

96.2 (0.5)

96.1 (0.6)

FEV1 (mean (SE)) L

Intervention

1.65 (0.19)

1.74 (0.23)

1.69 (0.24)

0.486

Control

1.57 (0.26)

1.55 (0.26)

1.59 (0.26)

FVC (mean (SE)) L

Intervention

2.23 (0.27)

2.34 (0.29)

2.28 (0.28)

0.156

Control

1.90 (0.33)

1.85 (0.32)

1.92 (0.32)

PImax (mean (SE)) cm H2O

Intervention

68.3 (6.3)

107.6 (8.4)

103.2 (8.1)

< 0.001

Control

69.5 (9.7)

71.8 (10.0)

66.7 (9.4)

HRQoL score (median (min ‐ max))

Intervention

629 (505 ‐ 701)

688 (609 ‐ 791)

0.071

HRQoL was assessed before and after the intervention.

Control

636 (626 ‐ 745)

638 (626 ‐ 737)

Weight (mean (SE)) kg

Intervention

36.4 (3.1)

37.8 (3.2)

38.3 (3.1)

0.342

Control

31.5 (4.6)

32.4 (4.7)

32.7 (4.5)

Fat‐free mass (mean (SE)) % of total

Intervention

81.6 (1.3)

82.6 (1.0)

82.5 (1.0)

0.001

Control

82.9 (1.8)

82.8 (1.8)

82.5 (1.9)

Body fat (mean (SE)) % of total

Intervention

18.4 (1.3)

17.4 (1.2)

17.5 (1.1)

0.023

Control

17.1 (1.8)

17.2 (1.8)

17.5 (1.9)

Compliance with physical training (mean (SE)) %

Intervention

97.5 (1.7)

70% of children completed all training sessions.

Control

Adverse effects

Intervention

No adverse effects occurred during training or exercise testing.

Control

CI: confidence interval
FEV1: forced expiratory volume in one second
FVC: forced vital capacity
HRQoL: health‐related quality of life
n.a.: not applicable
PImax: maximum inspiratory mouth pressure
SE: standard error
VO2 peak: peak oxygen consumption

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Study results for Santana‐Sosa 2014
Table 3. HRQoL results for Rovedder 2014

Health‐related quality of life

Exercise group (n = 19)

Control group (n = 22)

P value

HRQoL scale ‐ physical (median (interquartile range))

6.1 (‐4 to 8)

2.4 (‐10 to 13)

0.742

HRQoL scale ‐ body image (median (interquartile range))

3.3 (‐11 to 22)

3.0 (‐2 to 11)

0.915

HRQoL scale ‐ digestive (median (interquartile range))

‐1.0 (‐4 to 0)

‐0.5 (0 to 0)

0.953

HRQoL scale ‐ respiratory (median (interquartile range))

3.8 (0 to 11)

‐4.7 (‐1 to 7)

0.925

HRQoL scale ‐ emotional (median (interquartile range))

1.2 (‐6 to 6)

‐4.3 (‐13 to 6)

0.458

HRQoL scale ‐ social (median (interquartile range))

‐1.1 (‐11 to 5)

‐1.7 (‐5 to 11)

0.822

HRQoL scale ‐ food (median (interquartile range))

‐0.3 (‐11 to 6)

‐2.0 (‐11 to 0)

0.913

HRQoL scale ‐ treatment (median (interquartile range))

‐2.0 (‐11 to 0)

‐2.5 (‐11 to 11)

0.850

HRQoL scale ‐ vitality (median (interquartile range))

‐1.2 (‐16 to 8)

2.6 (‐8 to 10)

0.579

HRQoL scale ‐ health (median (interquartile range))

1.7 (‐11 to 16)

‐3.0 (‐11 to 0)

0.382

HRQoL scale ‐ weight (median (interquartile range))

4.6 (0 to 33)

12.1 (0 to 11)

0.410

HRQoL scale ‐ social role (median (interquartile range))

0.8 (‐8 to 8)

1.8 (‐2 to 0)

0.935

SF‐36 ‐ functional capacity (median (interquartile range))

2.8 (‐10 to 15)

2.0 (‐11 to 10)

0.916

SF‐36 ‐ physical aspects (median (interquartile range))

11.8 (‐25 to 50)

6.8 (‐6 to 31)

0.705

SF‐36 ‐ pain (mean (median (interquartile range))

‐7.2 (‐28 to 11)

8.0 (7 to 17)

0.100

SF‐36 ‐ general health (median (interquartile range))

3.7 (‐5 to 10)

‐3.5 (‐11 to 5)

0.197

SF‐36 ‐ vitality (median (interquartile range))

1.2 (‐15 to 20)

7.5 (‐1 to 21)

0.416

SF‐36 ‐ social aspects (median (interquartile range))

15.2 (0 to 33)

21.2 (0 to 66)

0.989

SF‐36 ‐ emotional aspects (median (interquartile range))

4.7 (‐12 to 37)

4.5 (‐12 to 25)

0.914

SF‐36 ‐ mental health (median (interquartile range))

‐0.8 (‐12 to 12)

0.9 (‐9 to 13)

0.752

Pre‐post changes in HRQoL measured by the CFQ and the SF‐36

CFQ: Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire
HRQoL: health‐related quality of life
SF‐36: Medical Outcomes Study‐36 Item Short‐Form Health Survey

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. HRQoL results for Rovedder 2014
Comparison 1. Aerobic training versus no physical training

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW) Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 At hospital discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.53 [4.85, 12.21]

1.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.91 [1.13, 8.69]

1.3 At 3 months

2

59

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.29 [‐2.71, 7.29]

1.4 At 6 months

1

25

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

18.33 [8.95, 27.71]

1.5 At 6 months off training

1

22

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

9.51 [‐1.32, 20.34]

1.6 At 18 months off training

1

18

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.86 [‐9.70, 15.42]

2 Change in FEV1(% predicted) Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 At hospital discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.03 [‐2.31, 6.37]

2.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.53 [‐2.93, 5.99]

2.3 At 3 months

2

58

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

7.21 [2.49, 11.94]

2.4 At 6 months

1

25

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.17 [8.59, 25.75]

2.5 At 6 months off training

1

23

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

16.92 [6.07, 27.77]

2.6 At 18 months off training

1

20

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

12.45 [1.27, 23.63]

2.7 Annual rate of change over 36 months

1

65

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.01 [‐0.06, 4.08]

3 Change in health‐related quality of life Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Change in strength (Newton metres) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Annual rate of change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise over 36 month (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Change in treadmill speed (km/h) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Change in treadmill exercise time (min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Change in heart rate (beats per min) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10.1 At rest at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.2 At maximal exercise at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.3 At maximal exercise ‐ annual rate of change over 36 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Change in oxygen saturation (%) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

11.1 During maximal exercise at hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11.2 During maximal exercise at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11.3 At rest at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 Annual rate of change in peak VE over 36 months (L/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

13 Change in FVC (% predicted) Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

13.1 At hospital discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.06 [‐2.55, 2.67]

13.2 At 3 months

2

58

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.89 [0.69, 9.08]

13.3 At 6 months

1

25

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

12.51 [5.90, 19.12]

13.4 At 1 month after discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.11 [‐2.64, 2.42]

13.5 At 6 months off training

1

23

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

15.09 [6.01, 24.17]

13.6 At 18 months off training

1

20

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

9.10 [‐0.94, 19.14]

13.7 Annual rate of change over 36 months

1

65

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.17 [0.47, 3.87]

14 Change in FEF25‐75 (% predicted) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

14.1 Annual rate of change

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15 Change in RV/TLC (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16 Change in FEV1/FVC (% predicted) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

16.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17 Change in total physical activity (counts per min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

17.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18 Change in moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity (hours per week) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

18.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19 Change in total physical activity (MJ/day) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

19.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20 Change in body weight (kg) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

20.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21 Change in BMI (kg/m2) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

21.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

22 Change in BMI z score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

22.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23 Change in fat‐free mass (kg) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

23.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.3 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.4 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.5 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.6 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

24 Change in body fat (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

24.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

24.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

24.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

24.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

25 Annual rate of change of ideal weight for height (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

26 Change in triceps skinfold thickness (mm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

26.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

27 Change in arm muscle circumference (cm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

27.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Aerobic training versus no physical training
Comparison 2. Anaerobic training versus no physical training

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW) Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 At hospital discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.95 [‐1.61, 5.51]

1.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

44

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.40 [‐4.03, 3.23]

1.3 At 3 months

2

41

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.54 [‐0.25, 11.34]

1.4 At 6 months

1

18

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.7 [5.98, 29.42]

1.5 At 6 months off training

1

16

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

11.59 [‐1.02, 24.20]

1.6 At 18 months off training

1

15

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

9.26 [‐4.26, 22.78]

2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.3 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.5 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.6 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Change in HRQoL Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Change in HRQoL physical function (CF questionnaire) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Change in peak power during WAnT (W) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Change in mean power during WAnT (W) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg BW) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Change in lower limb strength (Newton metres) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg body weight) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Change in lactate during maximal exercise (mmol/L) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

11.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 Change in peak oxygen saturation during maximal exercise (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

12.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13 Change in FVC (% predicted) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

13.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13.3 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13.4 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13.5 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13.6 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14 Change in RV/TLC (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

14.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15 Change in total physical activity (counts per min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16 Change in moderate to vigorous physical activity (hours per week) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

16.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17 Change in physical activity (MJ/day) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

17.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18 Change in weight (kg) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

18.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18.2 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19 Change in BMI (kg/m2) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

19.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20 Change in fat‐free mass (kg) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

20.1 At hospital discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.3 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.4 At 1 month after discharge

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.5 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.6 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21 Change in body fat (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

21.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.2 At 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.4 At 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Anaerobic training versus no physical training
Comparison 3. Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in VO2 peak during maximal exercise (ml/min per kg BW) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Change in FEV1 (% predicted) Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.3 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.5 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Annual change in FEV1 (mL) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 At 12 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Change in subjective health perception (CFQ‐R) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Change in Quality of Life: CFQ‐R Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 Physical Functioning at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 Vitality at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.3 Emotional state at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.4 Eating disturbances at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.5 Treatment burden at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.6 Health perception at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.7 Social limitations at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.8 Body image at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.9 Role limitations at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.10 Weight problems at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.11 Respiratory symptoms at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.12 Digestion symptoms at 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Change in peak power during WAnT (W per kg body weight) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Change in mean power during WAnT (W per kg body weight) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Change in muscle strength (all limbs) (1RM test) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8.1 Right upper limb at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8.2 Left upper limb at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8.3 Right lower limb at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8.4 Left lower limb at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Change in muscular strength ‐ leg press (kg; 1 RM test) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Chest press (kg; 1 RM test) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Latpull down (kg; 1 RM test) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

11.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 Change in Muscular Strength ‐ Biceps curl (kg; RM test) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

12.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of push ups Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

13.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Number of sit ups Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

14.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ Flexibility (cm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16 Change in Muscular Endurance ‐ hand grip strength (kg) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

16.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17 Change in peak work capacity during maximal exercise (W per kg BW) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

17.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

17.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18 Change in functional exercise capacity Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

18.1 6MWT distance (m) at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

18.2 6MWT distance (% predicted) at 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19 Change in peak heart rate during 6MWT (beats/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

19.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20 Annual change in peak heart rate (beat/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

20.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21 Annual change in VE (L/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

21.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

22 Change in peak ventilation (VE) during maximal exercise Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

22.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23 Annual change in lactate (mmol/l) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

23.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

24 Change in RR during 6MWT (breaths/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

24.1 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

25 Annual change in RR (breaths/min) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

25.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

25.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

26 Annual change in RER Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

26.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

26.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

27 Change in oxygen saturation (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

27.1 At rest (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

27.2 During 6MWT (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

28 Change in Borg breathlessness score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

28.1 At rest (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

28.2 During 6MWT (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

29 Annual change in Borg breathlessness score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

29.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

29.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

30 Change in Borg fatigue score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

30.1 At rest (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

30.2 During 6MWT (at 3 months)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

31 Annual change in Borg muscle effort Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

31.1 Constant load bicycle ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

31.2 Constant load arm ergometry (at 1 year)

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

32 Change in FVC (% predicted) Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

32.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

32.2 At 3 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

32.3 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

32.4 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

32.5 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

33 Annual change in FVC (mL) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

33.1 At 1 year

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

34 Change in RV/TLC (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

34.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

34.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

34.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

35 Change in Total Energy Expenditure (k/cal) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

35.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

36 Change in the Number of Steps Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

36.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

37 Change in Physical Activity (%) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

37.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

38 Change in vigorous physical activity (hours per week) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

38.1 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

38.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

38.3 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

39 Change in body weight (kg) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

39.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

39.2 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

39.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

39.4 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

40 Change in BMI (kg/m2) Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

40.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

40.2 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

40.3 Annual change

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

40.4 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

40.5 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

41 Change in sum of four skinfolds (mm) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

41.1 At 3‐6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

41.2 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

41.3 At 12‐18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

42 Change in body fat (%) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

42.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

42.2 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

42.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

42.4 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

43 Change in fat‐mass (kg) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

43.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

44 Change in fat‐free mass (kg) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

44.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

44.2 At 3 ‐ 6 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

44.3 At 6 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

44.4 At 12 ‐ 18 months off training

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

45 Change in metabolic parameters (HbA1c (%)) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

45.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

46 Change in metabolic parameters (Glucose AUC) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

46.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

47 Change in metabolic parameters (Total Insulin AUC) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

47.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

48 Change in metabolic parameters (Insulin Sensitivity Index) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

48.1 At 12 weeks

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

49 Change in Plasma Glucose (mmol/L) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

49.1 After 0 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

49.2 After 30 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

49.3 After 60 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

49.4 After 90 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

49.5 After 120 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

50 Change in Plasma Insulin (µU/mL) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

50.1 After 0 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

50.2 After 30 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

50.3 After 60 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

50.4 After 90 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

50.5 After 120 minutes

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Combined aerobic and anaerobic training versus no physical training