Dataset Information

Exercise for patients with major depression: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess the benefits and harms of exercise in patients with depression.

Design

Systematic review DATA SOURCES: Bibliographical databases were searched until 20 June 2017.

Eligibility criteria and outcomes

Eligible trials were randomised clinical trials assessing the effect of exercise in participants diagnosed with depression. Primary outcomes were depression severity, lack of remission and serious adverse events (eg, suicide) assessed at the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse events such as injuries, as well as assessment of depression severity and lack of remission during follow-up after the intervention.

Results

Thirty-five trials enrolling 2498 participants were included. The effect of exercise versus control on depression severity was -0.66 standardised mean difference (SMD) (95%?CI -0.86 to -0.46; p<0.001; grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE): very low quality). Restricting this analysis to the four trials that seemed less affected of bias, the effect vanished into -0.11 SMD (-0.41 to 0.18; p=0.45; GRADE: low quality). Exercise decreased the relative risk of no remission to 0.78 (0.68 to 0.90; p<0.001; GRADE: very low quality). Restricting this analysis to the two trials that seemed less affected of bias, the effect vanished into 0.95 (0.74 to 1.23; p=0.78). Trial sequential analysis excluded random error when all trials were analysed, but not if focusing on trials less affected of bias. Subgroup analyses found that trial size and intervention duration were inversely associated with effect size for both depression severity and lack of remission. There was no significant effect of exercise on secondary outcomes.

Conclusions

Trials with less risk of bias suggested no antidepressant effects of exercise and there were no significant effects of exercise on quality of life, depression severity or lack of remission during follow-up. Data for serious adverse events and adverse events were scarce not allowing conclusions for these outcomes.

Systematic review registration

The protocol was published in the journal Systematic Reviews: 2015; 4:40.

SUBMITTER: Krogh J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5623558 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Exercise for patients with major depression: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Krogh Jesper J Hjorthøj Carsten C Speyer Helene H Gluud Christian C Nordentoft Merete M

BMJ open 20170918 9

<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the benefits and harms of exercise in patients with depression.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review DATA SOURCES: Bibliographical databases were searched until 20 June 2017.<h4>Eligibility criteria and outcomes</h4>Eligible trials were randomised clinical trials assessing the effect of exercise in participants diagnosed with depression. Primary outcomes were depression severity, lack of remission and serious adverse events (eg, suicide) assessed at the end of the interve ...[more]

PMID: 28928174

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that exercise interventions are more effective than no exercise control and to compare the effectiveness of different exercise interventions in relieving pain and improving function in patients with lower limb osteoarthritis.Data sourcesNine electronic databases searched from inception to March 2012.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials comparing exercise interventions with each other or with no exercise control for adults with knee or hip osteoarthritis.Data extractionTwo reviewers evaluated eligibility and methodological quality. Main outcomes extracted were pain intensity and limitation of function. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence for exercise interventions. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to combine both direct (within trial) and indirect (between trial) evidence on treatment effectiveness.Results60 trials (44 knee, two hip, 14 mixed) covering 12 exercise interventions and with 8218 patients met inclusion criteria. Sequential analysis showed that as of 2002 sufficient evidence had been accrued to show significant benefit of exercise interventions over no exercise control. For pain relief, strengthening, flexibility plus strengthening, flexibility plus strengthening plus aerobic, aquatic strengthening, and aquatic strengthening plus flexibility, exercises were significantly more effective than no exercise control. A combined intervention of strengthening, flexibility, and aerobic exercise was also significantly more effective than no exercise control for improving limitation in function (standardised mean difference -0.63, 95% credible interval -1.16 to -0.10).ConclusionsAs of 2002 sufficient evidence had accumulated to show significant benefit of exercise over no exercise in patients with osteoarthritis, and further trials are unlikely to overturn this result. An approach combining exercises to increase strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity is likely to be most effective in the management of lower limb osteoarthritis. The evidence is largely from trials in patients with knee osteoarthritis.Protocol registrationPROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) No CRD42012002267.

Project description:BackgroundArterial stiffness is a common characteristic in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), and arterial tonometric technologies related to arterial stiffness are novel and effective methods and have an important value in the diagnosis and prognosis of CHF. In terms of ameliorating arterial stiffness in patients with CHF, exercise training is considered an adjuvant treatment and also an effective means in the diagnosis and judgment of prognosis. However, there are huge controversies and inconsistencies in these aspects. The objective of this meta-analysis was to systematically test the connection of arterial tonometry and exercise in patients with CHF.MethodsDatabases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, were accessed from inception to 7 March 2022. The meta-analysis was then conducted, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed jointly to further verify our tests and reach more convincing conclusions by using RevMan version 5.4 software, STATA version 16.0 software, and TSA version 0.9.5.10 Beta software.ResultsEighteen articles were included, with a total of 876 participants satisfying the inclusion criteria. The pooling revealed that flow-mediated dilation (FMD) was lower in basal condition [standardized mean difference (SMD): - 2.28%, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 3.47 to - 1.08, P < 0.001] and improved significantly after exercise (SMD: 5.96%, 95% CI 2.81 to 9.05, P < 0.001) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) compared with healthy participants. The high-intensity training exercise was more beneficial (SMD: 2.88%, 95% CI 1.78 to 3.97, P < 0.001) than the moderate-intensity training exercise to improve FMD in patients with CHF. For augmentation index (AIx), our study indicated no significant differences (SMD: 0.50%, 95% CI - 0.05 to 1.05, P = 0.074) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) compared with healthy participants. However, other outcomes of our study were not identified after further verification using TSA, and more high-quality studies are needed to reach definitive conclusions in the future.ConclusionsThis review shows that FMD is lower in basal condition and improves significantly after exercise in patients with HFrEF compared with healthy population; high-intensity training exercise is more beneficial than moderate-intensity training exercise to improve FMD in patients with CHF; besides, there are no significant differences in AIx in patients with HFpEF compared with the healthy population. More high-quality studies on this topic are warranted.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The evidence on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for major depressive disorder is unclear. METHODS:Our objective was to conduct a systematic review assessing the effects of SSRIs versus placebo, 'active' placebo, or no intervention in adult participants with major depressive disorder. We searched for eligible randomised clinical trials in The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycLIT, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, clinical trial registers of Europe and USA, websites of pharmaceutical companies, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the European Medicines Agency until January 2016. All data were extracted by at least two independent investigators. We used Cochrane systematic review methodology, Trial Sequential Analysis, and calculation of Bayes factor. An eight-step procedure was followed to assess if thresholds for statistical and clinical significance were crossed. Primary outcomes were reduction of depressive symptoms, remission, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were suicides, suicide attempts, suicide ideation, and quality of life. RESULTS:A total of 131 randomised placebo-controlled trials enrolling a total of 27,422 participants were included. None of the trials used 'active' placebo or no intervention as control intervention. All trials had high risk of bias. SSRIs significantly reduced the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) at end of treatment (mean difference -1.94 HDRS points; 95% CI -2.50 to -1.37; P?<?0.00001; 49 trials; Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted CI -2.70 to -1.18); Bayes factor below predefined threshold (2.01*10-23). The effect estimate, however, was below our predefined threshold for clinical significance of 3 HDRS points. SSRIs significantly decreased the risk of no remission (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.91; P?<?0.00001; 34 trials; Trial Sequential Analysis adjusted CI 0.83 to 0.92); Bayes factor (1426.81) did not confirm the effect). SSRIs significantly increased the risks of serious adverse events (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.75; P?=?0.009; 44 trials; Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted CI 1.03 to 1.89). This corresponds to 31/1000 SSRI participants will experience a serious adverse event compared with 22/1000 control participants. SSRIs also significantly increased the number of non-serious adverse events. There were almost no data on suicidal behaviour, quality of life, and long-term effects. CONCLUSIONS:SSRIs might have statistically significant effects on depressive symptoms, but all trials were at high risk of bias and the clinical significance seems questionable. SSRIs significantly increase the risk of both serious and non-serious adverse events. The potential small beneficial effects seem to be outweighed by harmful effects. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42013004420.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the benefits and harms of antithrombin III in critically ill patients.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Data sourcesCENTRAL, Medline, Embase, International Web of Science, LILACS, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and CINHAL (to November 2006); hand search of reference lists, contact with authors and experts, and search of registers of ongoing trials.Review methodsTwo reviewers independently selected parallel group randomised clinical trials comparing antithrombin with placebo or no intervention and extracted data related to study methods, interventions, outcomes, bias risk, and adverse events. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Trials in any type of critically ill patients in intensive care were eligible. All trials, irrespective of blinding or language status, that compared any antithrombin III regimen with no intervention or placebo were included. Trials were considered to be at low risk of bias if they had adequate randomisation procedure, blinding, and used intention to treat analysis. Risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were estimated with fixed and random effects models according to heterogeneity.Main outcome measuresMortality, length of stay in intensive care or hospital, quality of life, severity of sepsis, respiratory failure, duration of mechanical ventilation, incidence of surgical intervention, intervention effect among various populations, and adverse events (such as bleeding).Results20 trials randomly assigning 3458 patients met inclusion criteria. Eight trials had low risk of bias. Compared with placebo or no intervention, antithrombin III did not reduce overall mortality (relative risk 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.03). No subgroup analyses on risk of bias, populations of patients, or with and without adjuvant heparin yielded significant results. Antithrombin III increased the risk of bleeding events (1.52, 1.30 to 1.78). Heterogeneity was observed in only a few analyses.ConclusionAntithrombin III cannot be recommended for critically ill patients based on the available evidence.

Project description:BackgroundThe effects of intravenous glucocorticoids on postoperative delirium (POD) in adult patients undergoing major surgery remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess whether intravenous glucocorticoids can decrease POD incidence in the entire adult population undergoing major surgery and its association with patients age, type of surgery, and type of glucocorticoid.MethodsWe searched the relevant literature published before November 3, 2023, through Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. The primary outcome was POD incidence. The risk ratio for the primary outcome was calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay, ICU duration, mechanical ventilation duration, and occurrence of glucocorticoid-related adverse effects (e.g., infection and hyperglycemia). This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42022345997.ResultsWe included eight randomized controlled studies involving 8972 patients. For the entire adult population undergoing major surgery, intravenous glucocorticoids reduced the POD incidence (risk ratio = 0.704, 95% confidence interval, 0.519-0.955; P = 0.024). However, subgroups defined by type of surgery showed differential effects of glucocorticoids on POD. Intravenous glucocorticoids can not reduce POD incidence in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery (risk ratio = 0.961, 95% confidence interval, 0.769-1.202; P = 0.728), with firm evidence from trial sequential analysis. However, in major non-cardiac surgery, perioperative intravenous glucocorticoid reduced the incidence of POD (risk ratio = 0.491, 95% confidence interval, 0.338-0.714; P < 0.001), which warrants further studies due to inconclusive evidence by trial sequence analysis. In addition, the use of glucocorticoids may reduce the mechanical ventilation time (weighted mean difference, -1.350; 95% confidence interval, -1.846 to -0.854; P < 0.001) and ICU duration (weighted mean difference = -7.866; 95% confidence interval, -15.620 to -0.112; P = 0.047).ConclusionsFor the entire adult population undergoing major surgery, glucocorticoids reduced the POD incidence. However, the effects of glucocorticoids on POD appear to vary according to the type of surgery. In patients receiving major non-cardiac surgery, glucocorticoid may be an attractive drug in the prevention of POD, and further studies are needed to draw a definitive conclusion. In cardiac surgery, intravenous glucocorticoids have no such effect.

Project description:IntroductionGlucocorticosteroids (steroids) are widely used for sepsis patients. However, the potential benefits and harms of both high and low dose steroids remain unclear. A systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) might shed light on this clinically important question.MethodsA systematic review was conducted according to a published protocol and The Cochrane Handbook methodology including meta-analyses, TSA of randomised clinical trials, and external validity estimation (GRADE). Randomised clinical trials evaluating steroids were included for sepsis patients (systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock) aged >18 years. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cinahl were searched until 18 February 2015. No language restrictions were applied. Primary outcomes were mortality at longest follow-up and serious adverse events.ResultsA total of 35 trials randomising 4682 patients were assessed and reviewed in full text. All trials but two had high risk of bias. No statistically significant effect was found for any dose of steroids versus placebo or no intervention on mortality at maximal follow-up [relative risk (RR) 0.89; TSA adjusted confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.08]. Two trials with low risk of bias also showed no statistically significant difference (random-effects model RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.06-2.42). Similar results were obtained in subgroups of trials stratified according to high (>500 mg) or low (? 500 mg) dose hydrocortisone (or equivalent) (RR 0.87; TSA-adjusted CI 0.38-1.99; and RR 0.90; TSA-adjusted CI 0.49-1.67, respectively). There were also no statistically significant effects on serious adverse events other than mortality (RR 1.02; TSA-adjusted CI 0.7-1.48). The effects did not vary according to the degree of sepsis. TSA showed that many more randomised patients are needed before definitive conclusions may be drawn.ConclusionEvidence to support or negate the use of steroids in any dose in sepsis patients is lacking. The results of ongoing and future well-designed, large randomised clinical trials are needed.

Project description:The objective of this study was to assess the benefits and potential risks associated with different physical exercise modalities for managing symptoms in adults with major depressive disorder who were not receiving second-generation antidepressants or cognitive behavioral therapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted. The search included multiple databases: Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Clinical Trials repository, gray literature, and manual search. No language restrictions were applied. Eligible studies involved RCTs of adults with major depressive disorder who were not on antidepressants or receiving psychological therapy, comparing various exercise modalities with second-generation antidepressants or cognitive behavioral therapy, body-mind exercise, or no exercise interventions. Nine RCTs involving 678 adults were analyzed. The pooled results indicated a small clinical effect favoring exercise in reducing depressive symptoms, although the difference was not statistically significant (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI [- 0.58, 0.04], P = 0.09). Subgroup analyses suggested that intervention duration, frequency, intensity, supervision, age, overweight/obesity status, and diagnosis of depression could influence treatment outcomes. A sensitivity analysis was conducted for studies with controls without exercise interventions and a low risk of bias in the domains related to the randomization process and deviations from the intended interventions. The results showed that there are no statistically significant differences when interventions are compared with medication and body-mind exercise (p = 0.12, I2 = 78%). Furthermore, the analysis showed a moderate effect size favoring exercise, but no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.05), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 85%). The evidence quality was generally low to very low, and methodological limitations compromised the certainty of the findings. Adverse events associated with exercise were manageable. The study emphasizes the need for well-designed RCTs to provide clearer insights into the potential benefits of exercise in managing major depressive disorder symptoms. Caution is warranted in interpreting these results due to the limitations of the included studies.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022356741.

Dataset Information

Exercise for patients with major depression: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Objectives

Design

Eligibility criteria and outcomes

Results

Conclusions

Systematic review registration

Publications

Exercise for patients with major depression: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets