The efficacy of different types of intradialytic exercise for patients undergoing hemodialysis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
HaiQiang Jiang, Yu Wang, Jia Peng, Shuang Wu, Chuanfang Wu
{"title":"The efficacy of different types of intradialytic exercise for patients undergoing hemodialysis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"HaiQiang Jiang, Yu Wang, Jia Peng, Shuang Wu, Chuanfang Wu","doi":"10.1186/s12882-025-04381-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intradialytic exercise interventions improve dialysis efficacy; however, their comparative efficacy remains unclear, limiting evidence-based clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review and compare the effects of different intradialytic exercises on dialysis adequacy in patients undergoing hemodialysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of intradialytic exercise on dialysis adequacy in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Studies published in the database from its inception to November 1, 2023, were included. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata 15.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 24 studies involving 786 patients were included in this analysis. The interventions comprised intradialytic aerobic exercise (IAE), intradialytic resistance exercise (IRE), combined intradialytic aerobic and resistance exercise (IAE + IRE), intradialytic respiratory muscle exercise (IRME), intradialytic electrical muscle stimulation (IEMS), and routine hemodialysis nursing (RHN). Among all pairwise comparisons, only IRME versus RHN showed a statistically significant difference (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.16). No statistically significant differences were observed in any other pairwise comparisons, including those involving RHN and those between different exercise modalities. Nevertheless, IAE + IRE demonstrated the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values for both the urea clearance index and reduction rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current evidence is insufficient to conclude that any specific type of intradialytic exercise significantly improves dialysis adequacy. Nevertheless, SUCRA rankings indicate a potential benefit, with IAE + IRE demonstrating the highest probability of benefit. Given the limited statistical power, further high-quality studies are warranted to confirm these findings. The review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO(CRD42023484645).</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9089,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nephrology","volume":"26 1","pages":"450"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12341117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-025-04381-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Intradialytic exercise interventions improve dialysis efficacy; however, their comparative efficacy remains unclear, limiting evidence-based clinical practice.

Objective: To systematically review and compare the effects of different intradialytic exercises on dialysis adequacy in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of intradialytic exercise on dialysis adequacy in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Studies published in the database from its inception to November 1, 2023, were included. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata 15.0.

Results: A total of 24 studies involving 786 patients were included in this analysis. The interventions comprised intradialytic aerobic exercise (IAE), intradialytic resistance exercise (IRE), combined intradialytic aerobic and resistance exercise (IAE + IRE), intradialytic respiratory muscle exercise (IRME), intradialytic electrical muscle stimulation (IEMS), and routine hemodialysis nursing (RHN). Among all pairwise comparisons, only IRME versus RHN showed a statistically significant difference (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.16). No statistically significant differences were observed in any other pairwise comparisons, including those involving RHN and those between different exercise modalities. Nevertheless, IAE + IRE demonstrated the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values for both the urea clearance index and reduction rate.

Conclusion: Current evidence is insufficient to conclude that any specific type of intradialytic exercise significantly improves dialysis adequacy. Nevertheless, SUCRA rankings indicate a potential benefit, with IAE + IRE demonstrating the highest probability of benefit. Given the limited statistical power, further high-quality studies are warranted to confirm these findings. The review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO(CRD42023484645).

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

不同类型的透析内运动对血液透析患者的疗效:随机对照试验的系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。
研究背景:分析内运动干预可提高透析疗效;然而,它们的相对疗效尚不清楚,限制了基于证据的临床实践。目的:系统回顾和比较不同的透析内运动对血液透析患者透析充分性的影响。方法:系统检索PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science和Cochrane Library中评估分析内运动对血液透析患者透析充分性疗效的随机对照试验。数据库从建立到2023年11月1日期间发表的研究也被纳入其中。采用Stata 15.0进行统计分析。结果:本分析共纳入24项研究,涉及786例患者。干预措施包括分析内有氧运动(IAE)、分析内阻力运动(IRE)、分析内有氧和阻力联合运动(IAE + IRE)、分析内呼吸肌运动(IRME)、分析内肌肉电刺激(IEMS)和常规血液透析护理(RHN)。在所有两两比较中,只有IRME与RHN有统计学差异(MD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.16)。在其他两两比较中没有观察到统计学上的显著差异,包括那些涉及RHN和不同运动方式之间的比较。在累积排序曲线(SUCRA)下,IAE + IRE在尿素清除率和还原率上均表现出最高的表面。结论:目前的证据不足以得出任何特定类型的透析内运动能显著提高透析充分性的结论。尽管如此,SUCRA排名表明了潜在的益处,IAE + IRE显示了最大的获益可能性。鉴于有限的统计能力,需要进一步的高质量研究来证实这些发现。审查方案已在PROSPERO注册(CRD42023484645)。临床试验号:不适用。
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
BMC Nephrology
BMC Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
375
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Nephrology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of kidney and associated disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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