Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Gait and Mobility in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

3区 综合性期刊
Katherine L Hsieh, Andrew Foster, Logan MacIntyre, Reagan Carr
{"title":"Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Gait and Mobility in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Katherine L Hsieh, Andrew Foster, Logan MacIntyre, Reagan Carr","doi":"10.3390/ijerph21101325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Older adults demonstrate gait impairments that increase their risk for falls. These age-related mobility impairments are in part due to declines in muscle mass and strength. High-intensity exercise can improve muscle strength and mobility but may not be tolerable for older adults due to musculoskeletal injury and pain. Blood flow restriction (BFR) with lower-intensity exercise offers a strategy that may be more tolerable for older adults, but whether BFR improves gait and mobility in older adults is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of BFR on gait and mobility in healthy older adults. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were systematically searched for articles utilizing BFR in older adults. Articles were included if adults were over 60 years, did not have chronic health conditions, had undergone randomized controlled trials, and presented objectively measured gait outcomes. The search identified 1501 studies, of which 9 were included in the systematic review and 8 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcome measures included the Timed Up and Go (TUG), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), 400 m walk test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and 10 m walk test. Meta-analyses found improvements in the TUG (mean difference (MD) = -0.71; 95% CI = -1.05, -0.37; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and SPPB (MD = -0.94; 95% CI = -1.48, -0.39; <i>p</i> < 0.001) in BFR compared to no BFR. There were no differences in gait speed (MD = 0.59; 95% CI = -0.22, 1.41; <i>p</i> = 0.16). BFR may be effective for gait and mobility tasks over shorter distances. Clinicians may consider incorporating BFR to improve mobility and gait function in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":49056,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health","volume":"21 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11507983/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21101325","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Older adults demonstrate gait impairments that increase their risk for falls. These age-related mobility impairments are in part due to declines in muscle mass and strength. High-intensity exercise can improve muscle strength and mobility but may not be tolerable for older adults due to musculoskeletal injury and pain. Blood flow restriction (BFR) with lower-intensity exercise offers a strategy that may be more tolerable for older adults, but whether BFR improves gait and mobility in older adults is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of BFR on gait and mobility in healthy older adults. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were systematically searched for articles utilizing BFR in older adults. Articles were included if adults were over 60 years, did not have chronic health conditions, had undergone randomized controlled trials, and presented objectively measured gait outcomes. The search identified 1501 studies, of which 9 were included in the systematic review and 8 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcome measures included the Timed Up and Go (TUG), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), 400 m walk test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and 10 m walk test. Meta-analyses found improvements in the TUG (mean difference (MD) = -0.71; 95% CI = -1.05, -0.37; p < 0.001) and SPPB (MD = -0.94; 95% CI = -1.48, -0.39; p < 0.001) in BFR compared to no BFR. There were no differences in gait speed (MD = 0.59; 95% CI = -0.22, 1.41; p = 0.16). BFR may be effective for gait and mobility tasks over shorter distances. Clinicians may consider incorporating BFR to improve mobility and gait function in older adults.

血流限制对老年人步态和活动能力的影响:系统回顾与元分析》。
老年人的步态障碍会增加他们跌倒的风险。这些与年龄有关的行动障碍部分是由于肌肉质量和力量下降造成的。高强度运动可以改善肌肉力量和活动能力,但由于肌肉骨骼损伤和疼痛,老年人可能无法忍受。血流限制(BFR)和低强度运动提供了一种老年人可能更容易接受的策略,但血流限制是否能改善老年人的步态和活动能力尚不清楚。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在确定 BFR 对健康老年人步态和活动能力的影响。我们在 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library 和 CINAHL 上系统地搜索了有关老年人使用 BFR 的文章。只要是 60 岁以上、无慢性疾病、进行过随机对照试验并提供了客观测量的步态结果的文章均被收录。搜索发现了 1501 项研究,其中 9 项纳入系统综述,8 项纳入荟萃分析。结果测量包括定时起立行走 (TUG)、6 分钟步行测试 (6MWT)、400 米步行测试、短期体能测试 (SPPB) 和 10 米步行测试。元分析发现,与未进行 BFR 相比,BFR 的 TUG(平均差异 (MD) = -0.71;95% CI = -1.05, -0.37;p < 0.001)和 SPPB(MD = -0.94;95% CI = -1.48, -0.39;p < 0.001)均有改善。步速方面没有差异(MD = 0.59;95% CI = -0.22,1.41;P = 0.16)。BFR 可能对较短距离的步态和移动任务有效。临床医生可以考虑采用BFR来改善老年人的移动和步态功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14422
期刊介绍: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) (ISSN 1660-4601) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes, and short communications in the interdisciplinary area of environmental health sciences and public health. It links several scientific disciplines including biology, biochemistry, biotechnology, cellular and molecular biology, chemistry, computer science, ecology, engineering, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, microbiology, oncology, pathology, pharmacology, and toxicology, in an integrated fashion, to address critical issues related to environmental quality and public health. Therefore, IJERPH focuses on the publication of scientific and technical information on the impacts of natural phenomena and anthropogenic factors on the quality of our environment, the interrelationships between environmental health and the quality of life, as well as the socio-cultural, political, economic, and legal considerations related to environmental stewardship and public health. The 2018 IJERPH Outstanding Reviewer Award has been launched! This award acknowledge those who have generously dedicated their time to review manuscripts submitted to IJERPH. See full details at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph/awards.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信