Lifting Limits: The Impact of Strength Training in Down Syndrome-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.1 2区医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research Pub Date : 2025-06-09 DOI:10.1111/jir.13259

Luis Iglesias-Díaz, Susana López-Ortiz, Celia García-Chico, Alejandro Santos-Lozano, Javier González-Lázaro

{"title":"Lifting Limits: The Impact of Strength Training in Down Syndrome-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Luis Iglesias-Díaz, Susana López-Ortiz, Celia García-Chico, Alejandro Santos-Lozano, Javier González-Lázaro","doi":"10.1111/jir.13259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: People with Down syndrome (DS) may exhibit several musculoskeletal disorders, including alterations in muscle tone and activation. Strength training could mitigate the loss of muscle strength and, therefore, improve strength values in this population. Additionally, it may influence health-related outcomes such as physical function, body composition and biochemical markers.Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to analyse the characteristics and effects of strength training in people with DS.Methods: A search was conducted from inception to 22 April 2025. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the 15-item Tool for the assEssment of Study qualiTy and reporting in EXercise (TESTEX). In addition, the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane's risk of bias 2 (RoB2).Results: A total of 10 RCTs (n = 233 participants) were included in the systematic review, of which three (n = 111 participants) could be meta-analysed. The pooled effect showed statistically significant benefits for upper (mean difference [MD] = 5.66 kg, 95% CI 2.42-8.91) and lower (MD = 20.43 kg, 95% CI 1.76-39.10) body strength. The TESTEX scores for most RCTs ranged from 3 to 12 points. The risk of bias analysis indicated that eight RCTs had a low risk of bias, whereas the remaining studies were classified as high risk.Conclusion: Strength training may significantly improve muscle strength in people with DS. However, further research is needed to assess the long-term effects on physical function, body composition and biochemical markers.","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.13259","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People with Down syndrome (DS) may exhibit several musculoskeletal disorders, including alterations in muscle tone and activation. Strength training could mitigate the loss of muscle strength and, therefore, improve strength values in this population. Additionally, it may influence health-related outcomes such as physical function, body composition and biochemical markers.

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to analyse the characteristics and effects of strength training in people with DS.

Methods: A search was conducted from inception to 22 April 2025. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the 15-item Tool for the assEssment of Study qualiTy and reporting in EXercise (TESTEX). In addition, the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane's risk of bias 2 (RoB2).

Results: A total of 10 RCTs (n = 233 participants) were included in the systematic review, of which three (n = 111 participants) could be meta-analysed. The pooled effect showed statistically significant benefits for upper (mean difference [MD] = 5.66 kg, 95% CI 2.42-8.91) and lower (MD = 20.43 kg, 95% CI 1.76-39.10) body strength. The TESTEX scores for most RCTs ranged from 3 to 12 points. The risk of bias analysis indicated that eight RCTs had a low risk of bias, whereas the remaining studies were classified as high risk.

Conclusion: Strength training may significantly improve muscle strength in people with DS. However, further research is needed to assess the long-term effects on physical function, body composition and biochemical markers.

查看原文本刊更多论文

举重极限：力量训练对唐氏综合症的影响——系统回顾和荟萃分析。

背景：唐氏综合征（DS）患者可能表现出几种肌肉骨骼疾病，包括肌肉张力和激活的改变。力量训练可以减轻肌肉力量的损失，从而提高该人群的力量值。此外，它还可能影响与健康相关的结果，如身体功能、身体成分和生化指标。目的：对随机对照试验（RCTs）进行系统回顾和荟萃分析，旨在分析退行性椎体滑移患者力量训练的特点和效果。方法：从开始到2025年4月22日进行检索。采用15项研究质量评估工具（TESTEX）评估纳入的随机对照试验的方法学质量。此外，采用Cochrane's risk of bias 2 （RoB2）评估偏倚风险。结果：系统评价共纳入10项rct （n = 233名受试者），其中3项（n = 111名受试者）可进行meta分析。综合效应显示，较高（平均差异[MD] = 5.66 kg, 95% CI 2.42-8.91）和较低（MD = 20.43 kg, 95% CI 1.76-39.10）的身体力量有统计学意义的益处。大多数随机对照试验的TESTEX分数在3到12分之间。偏倚风险分析显示，8项rct为低偏倚风险，其余研究为高风险。结论：力量训练可显著提高退行性椎体滑移患者的肌力。然而，需要进一步的研究来评估对身体功能、身体成分和生化指标的长期影响。

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

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research Multiple-

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

5.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Intellectual Disability Research is devoted exclusively to the scientific study of intellectual disability and publishes papers reporting original observations in this field. The subject matter is broad and includes, but is not restricted to, findings from biological, educational, genetic, medical, psychiatric, psychological and sociological studies, and ethical, philosophical, and legal contributions that increase knowledge on the treatment and prevention of intellectual disability and of associated impairments and disabilities, and/or inform public policy and practice. Expert reviews on themes in which recent research has produced notable advances will be included. Such reviews will normally be by invitation.