Supervised vs home-based exercise program in kidney transplant recipients: A pilot pragmatic non-randomized study.

Anna Crepaldi, Giovanni Piva, Nicola Lamberti, Michele Felisatti, Luca Pomidori, Yuri Battaglia, Fabio Manfredini, Alda Storari, Pablo Jesús López-Soto
{"title":"Supervised <i>vs</i> home-based exercise program in kidney transplant recipients: A pilot pragmatic non-randomized study.","authors":"Anna Crepaldi, Giovanni Piva, Nicola Lamberti, Michele Felisatti, Luca Pomidori, Yuri Battaglia, Fabio Manfredini, Alda Storari, Pablo Jesús López-Soto","doi":"10.5500/wjt.v14.i4.96244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although the benefits of exercise for kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) have been widely demonstrated, these patients experience several barriers in undertaking a structured exercise program in hospital and non-hospital facilities.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the effects of a supervised moderate-intensity gym-based intervention with a home-based low-intensity walking program on exercise capacity in KTRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>KTRs were asked to choose between two six-month programs. The first group performed a low-intensity interval walking intervention at home-based exercise intervention (HBex). The second group performed a supervised training program at an adapted physical activity gym (Sgym), including aerobic and resistance training. The outcomes, collected at baseline and at the end of the programs, included the 6-minute walking test, the peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) during a treadmill test, the 5-time sit-to-stand test, and blood pressure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen patients agreed to participate and self-selected into the HBex (<i>n</i> = 9) and Sgym (<i>n</i> = 8) groups. Two patients in the Sgym group dropped out because of familial problems. At baseline, patients in the HBex group were significantly older and had lower walking distance, VO2peak, and lower limb strength. Primary outcome changes were significantly greater in the HBex group than in the Sgym group (52 ± 23 m <i>vs</i> 8 ± 34; <i>P</i> = 0.005). No other significant differences between groups were observed. Both groups improved most of the outcomes in the within-group comparisons, with significant variations in VO2 peak.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Six-month moderate-intensity supervised or low-intensity home-based training programs effectively improved exercise capacity in KTRs. Gym-based programs combine aerobic and resistance training; however, in-home walking may be proposed for frail KTRs.</p>","PeriodicalId":68893,"journal":{"name":"世界移植杂志(英文版)","volume":"14 4","pages":"96244"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11438937/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"世界移植杂志(英文版)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5500/wjt.v14.i4.96244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although the benefits of exercise for kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) have been widely demonstrated, these patients experience several barriers in undertaking a structured exercise program in hospital and non-hospital facilities.

Aim: To compare the effects of a supervised moderate-intensity gym-based intervention with a home-based low-intensity walking program on exercise capacity in KTRs.

Methods: KTRs were asked to choose between two six-month programs. The first group performed a low-intensity interval walking intervention at home-based exercise intervention (HBex). The second group performed a supervised training program at an adapted physical activity gym (Sgym), including aerobic and resistance training. The outcomes, collected at baseline and at the end of the programs, included the 6-minute walking test, the peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) during a treadmill test, the 5-time sit-to-stand test, and blood pressure.

Results: Seventeen patients agreed to participate and self-selected into the HBex (n = 9) and Sgym (n = 8) groups. Two patients in the Sgym group dropped out because of familial problems. At baseline, patients in the HBex group were significantly older and had lower walking distance, VO2peak, and lower limb strength. Primary outcome changes were significantly greater in the HBex group than in the Sgym group (52 ± 23 m vs 8 ± 34; P = 0.005). No other significant differences between groups were observed. Both groups improved most of the outcomes in the within-group comparisons, with significant variations in VO2 peak.

Conclusion: Six-month moderate-intensity supervised or low-intensity home-based training programs effectively improved exercise capacity in KTRs. Gym-based programs combine aerobic and resistance training; however, in-home walking may be proposed for frail KTRs.

肾移植受者的监督vs家庭锻炼计划:一项试点实用的非随机研究。
背景:尽管运动对肾移植受者(KTRs)的益处已被广泛证实,但这些患者在医院和非医院设施中进行有组织的运动计划时遇到了一些障碍。目的:比较以监督为基础的中等强度健身房干预与以家庭为基础的低强度步行计划对ktr运动能力的影响。方法:要求ktr在两个为期六个月的计划中进行选择。第一组在以家庭为基础的运动干预(HBex)中进行低强度间歇步行干预。第二组在适应性体育运动健身房(Sgym)进行有监督的训练计划,包括有氧和阻力训练。在基线和项目结束时收集的结果包括6分钟步行测试、跑步机测试期间的峰值耗氧量(vo2峰值)、5次坐立测试和血压。结果:17例患者同意参与并自行选择进入HBex组(n = 9)和Sgym组(n = 8)。Sgym组中有两名患者因家庭问题而退出。基线时,HBex组患者明显变老,步行距离、VO2peak和下肢力量较低。HBex组的主要转归变化显著大于Sgym组(52±23 m vs 8±34 m;P = 0.005)。各组间未观察到其他显著差异。两组在组内比较中都改善了大部分结果,VO2峰值有显著差异。结论:6个月的中强度监督训练或低强度家庭训练可有效提高ktr患者的运动能力。以健身房为基础的项目结合了有氧和阻力训练;然而,体弱多病的九老族可建议在家中散步。
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
364
×
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