Musculoskeletal rehabilitation in controlled trials: Is it correct to compare different types of exercise?

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sao Paulo Medical Journal Pub Date : 2025-05-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1516-3180.2024.0374.29012025
André Pontes-Silva
{"title":"Musculoskeletal rehabilitation in controlled trials: Is it correct to compare different types of exercise?","authors":"André Pontes-Silva","doi":"10.1590/1516-3180.2024.0374.29012025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the literature on musculoskeletal rehabilitation that compare different types of exercise; however, the comparison is not relevant because the groups generally perform different physical efforts, and the researchers are not aware of this, nor do they control for the confounding variables.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To discuss the methods of comparison of different types of exercises in musculoskeletal rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Design and settings: </strong>Short communication developed at the Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos (SP), Brazil.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A narrative review of the motion cadence, time-under-tension, actual duration of an exercise session, and total physical effort was conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>To compare the different types of exercise, it is crucial that the parameters of the proposed exercises are the same between the groups, i.e., the exercise intensity, total physical effort, and actual duration of the exercise session.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is correct to compare different types of exercise, however, in the field of musculoskeletal rehabilitation, RCTs adequately controlled for these variables are lacking.</p>","PeriodicalId":49574,"journal":{"name":"Sao Paulo Medical Journal","volume":"143 3","pages":"e2024374"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12088647/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sao Paulo Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2024.0374.29012025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the literature on musculoskeletal rehabilitation that compare different types of exercise; however, the comparison is not relevant because the groups generally perform different physical efforts, and the researchers are not aware of this, nor do they control for the confounding variables.

Objectives: To discuss the methods of comparison of different types of exercises in musculoskeletal rehabilitation.

Design and settings: Short communication developed at the Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos (SP), Brazil.

Methods: A narrative review of the motion cadence, time-under-tension, actual duration of an exercise session, and total physical effort was conducted.

Results: To compare the different types of exercise, it is crucial that the parameters of the proposed exercises are the same between the groups, i.e., the exercise intensity, total physical effort, and actual duration of the exercise session.

Conclusion: It is correct to compare different types of exercise, however, in the field of musculoskeletal rehabilitation, RCTs adequately controlled for these variables are lacking.

对照试验中的肌肉骨骼康复:比较不同类型的运动是否正确?
背景:文献中有几个关于肌肉骨骼康复的随机对照试验(rct),比较了不同类型的运动;然而,这种比较是不相关的,因为两组人通常会进行不同的体力活动,研究人员没有意识到这一点,也没有控制混杂变量。目的:探讨不同类型运动在肌肉骨骼康复中的比较方法。设计和设置:在巴西奥卡洛斯斯(SP)的联邦大学奥卡洛斯斯(UFSCar)开发的短通信。方法:对运动节奏、紧张时间、每次运动的实际持续时间和总体力进行记叙性回顾。结果:为了比较不同类型的运动,至关重要的是,建议的运动参数在组之间是相同的,即运动强度,总体力消耗和实际运动时间。结论:比较不同类型的运动是正确的,但在肌肉骨骼康复领域,缺乏对这些变量进行充分控制的随机对照试验。
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
Sao Paulo Medical Journal
Sao Paulo Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
210
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published bimonthly by the Associação Paulista de Medicina, the journal accepts articles in the fields of clinical health science (internal medicine, gynecology and obstetrics, mental health, surgery, pediatrics and public health). Articles will be accepted in the form of original articles (clinical trials, cohort, case-control, prevalence, incidence, accuracy and cost-effectiveness studies and systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis), narrative reviews of the literature, case reports, short communications and letters to the editor. Papers with a commercial objective will not be accepted.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信