What are the effects of different modes of exercise training for intermittent claudication? - A Cochrane Review summary with commentary.
Ayesha Afridi, Farooq Azam Rathore
PMID 33791815WHAT IT FOUND
Alternative exercise modes showed little to no difference compared to supervised walking for pain and walking distance in patients with intermittent claudication.
Evidence was low due to bias and small samples. Alternative modes may help when walking is not an option.
Key findings
01There was little to no difference between alternative exercise programs and supervised walking exercise for maximum and pain-free walking distance.
02The certainty of evidence was low mainly because of risk of bias, small sample size, and clinical inconsistency.
03Alternative exercise modes may be useful when supervised walking exercise is not an option.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The evidence is rated as low certainty due to risk of bias in the included trials. The sample sizes in the original studies were small. There was clinical inconsistency across the included studies, making it hard to draw firm conclusions. The review only compared supervised alternative modes to supervised walking; it did not assess home-based versions of these alternatives.
Declared interests
The authors of this summary and commentary have no conflicts of interest to declare.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the 'little to no difference' finding as evidence that alternative exercises are ineffective. The lack of difference may be due to the low certainty of the evidence and small sample sizes, not necessarily because the treatments are identical in effect.