Search

Abstract Background Ageing leads to decreased physical function, which can impact independent living and raise health risks, increasing demand on healthcare resources. Finding affordable and accessible exercise to improve physical function is necessary for a population seemingly resistant to strength and balance training in leisure settings. This review aimed to evaluate whether unsupervised home-based exercises improve lower extremity function in older adults. Methods We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs investigating unsupervised home-based exercises’ effects on physical function in older adults through English and Mandarin databases. Studies’ methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane’s Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were conducted on lower extremity functions outcomes. Results Of the 6791 identified articles, 10 English studies (907 participants) were included, 8 studies (839 participants) were used for final meta-analysis, with no Mandarin studies. Studies were largely based in Europe with mostly moderate risk of bias. Most interventions were multicomponent lasting 10–40 min/session, 3 times/week. Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences in 5 sit-to-stand (p = 0.05; I2 = 0%), maximal knee extension strength (p = 0.61; I2 = 71%), 10 m maximal walking speed (p = 0.22; I2 = 30%), timed-up-to-go (p = 0.54; I2 = 0%), and short physical performance battery (p = 0.32; I2 = 98%) between exercise and control groups. Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests that unsupervised home-based exercise programmes have little impact on lower extremity functions in older adults. This review is limited by the small number of included studies, sample sizes, and high heterogeneity. There is a need to understand why this format lacks efficacy, and design more beneficial home-based exercise programmes.

Abstract The aim of this work is to determine the effect of upper‐body high intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic risks in individuals with chronic paraplegia. Twenty‐seven individuals (14 females, 13 males, mean ± SD age: 46 ± 9 years) with chronic paraplegia (spinal cord injury between T2 and L5 >1‐year post‐injury) took part in a randomized controlled trial and were included in the final analysis. Participants in the HIIT group (n = 18) performed ∼30 min of arm crank exercise (60 s intervals at 80%–90% peak heart rate) four times per week, for 6 weeks. Participants in the control (CON) group (n = 9) were asked to maintain their habitual diet and physical activity patterns over the study period. Outcome measures were taken at baseline and follow‐up. The primary outcome measures were fasting insulin, peak power output (PPO) and peak aerobic capacity (V̇O2peak). Secondary outcome measures included body composition, postprandial glycaemic control, fasting blood lipids, inflammatory biomarkers and resting blood pressure. Differences between groups were assessed by ANCOVA, using baseline values as a covariate. PPO was higher in the HIIT (101 W, 97–106) compared to the CON (90 W, 83–96) group at follow‐up (P = 0.006). There were no differences in fasting insulin (P = 0.415) or relative V̇O2peak (P = 0.417). Postprandial Matsuda insulin sensitivity index (ISIMatsuda) was higher in the HIIT (5.42, 4.69–6.15) compared to the CON (3.75, 2.46–5.04) group at follow‐up (P = 0.036). Six weeks of upper‐body HIIT increased PPO and ISIMatsuda, with no other beneficial effect on cardiometabolic component risks in persons with chronic paraplegia. Highlights What is the central question of this study? What is the effect of upper‐body high intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic component risks in individuals with chronic paraplegia? What is the main finding and its importance? Six weeks of upper‐body HIIT increased PPO and improved insulin sensitivity, but had no beneficial effect on other cardiometabolic component risks in persons with chronic paraplegia. The large effect size observed for insulin sensitivity may be important in terms of reducing the risk of type‐2 diabetes in this population.

Abstract The premise of research in human physiology is to explore a multifaceted system whilst identifying one or a few outcomes of interest. Therefore, the control of potentially confounding variables requires careful thought regarding the extent of control and complexity of standardisation. One common factor to control prior to testing is diet, as food and fluid provision may deviate from participants’ habitual diets, yet a self‐report and replication method can be flawed by under‐reporting. Researchers may also need to consider standardisation of physical activity, whether it be through familiarisation trials, wash‐out periods, or guidance on levels of physical activity to be achieved before trials. In terms of pharmacological agents, the ethical implications of standardisation require researchers to carefully consider how medications, caffeine consumption and oral contraceptive prescriptions may affect the study. For research in females, it should be considered whether standardisation between‐ or within‐participants in regards to menstrual cycle phase is most relevant. The timing of measurements relative to various other daily events is relevant to all physiological research and so it can be important to standardise when measurements are made. This review summarises the areas of standardisation which we hope will be considered useful to anyone involved in human physiology research, including when and how one can apply standardisation to various contexts.