Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Qual Life Res ; 33(2): 433-442, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37985639

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Many patients with acute coronary syndrome experience problematic or altered sexual function. This aspect of the disease is frequently ignored or overlooked by the healthcare community even though it can strongly influence health-related patient quality of life (HRQoL). Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the effects of a specific cardiac rehabilitation programme focused on aerobic and neuromuscular strength-resistance training to those of a classic rehabilitation programme, both in terms of HRQoL and erectile dysfunction in patients with acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: This study reports both secondary and unregistered outcomes from a double-blinded, randomised, and controlled clinical trial. The proposed intervention was based on the completion of a 20-session (10-week) cardiac rehabilitation programme for patients with cardiovascular disease. The patient cohort had been diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome and was recruited at the Cardiology Service of a private tertiary hospital. The outcomes assessed in this study were HRQoL and erectile disfunction assessed at baseline, after the intervention, and at a 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 30 participants were randomly allocated to each study arm. The results of the two-way mixed ANOVAs showed significant group × time interactions for all the outcome measures (EQ-5D_index, p = 0.004; EQ-5D_VAS, p = 0.017; QLMI-Q, p ≤ 0.001; and IIEF-5, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The neuromuscular strength training programme was more effective than the classic strength training programme in terms of increasing the HRQoL and improving erectile dysfunction in patients following acute coronary syndrome, with differences still remaining between these groups at the 6-month follow-up.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Cardiac Rehabilitation , Erectile Dysfunction , Resistance Training , Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological , Male , Humans , Quality of Life/psychology , Resistance Training/methods
2.
PLoS One ; 19(6): e0303979, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38843271

ABSTRACT

The aim of this present clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent prehabilitation programme administered through educational videos versus another programme based on written exercise recommendations, in patients scheduled for lumbar radiculopathy surgery. This study will be a multicentre, controlled, randomised, parallel clinical trial. One hundred participants undergoing lumbar radiculopathy surgery who meet the established inclusion criteria will be recruited at different Spanish hospitals. The experimental group will follow a 4-week prehabilitation programme combining therapeutic exercise, back care education, and pain neuroscience education delivered through videos designed for consumption at home. The control group will be provided with written instructions to perform therapeutic exercises during the same prehabilitation time period. The primary outcome of the study will be disability, assessed using the Spanish version of the Oswestry Disability Index. The secondary outcomes will be pain perception, health-related quality of life, fear avoidance, kinesiophobia, catastrophising, anxiety, depression, physical activity, and the treatment satisfaction of the patients. This study will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a home-based multicomponent prehabilitation programme that addresses some already identified barriers to patient attendance in face-to-face programmes. Understanding the medium and long-term effects of pre-surgery lumbar muscle training and pain neuroscience education administered via instructional videos watched by patients at home, will help improve the design of prehabilitation programmes in this population while also improving the cost-effectiveness of such interventions.


Subject(s)
Patient Education as Topic , Radiculopathy , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Exercise Therapy/methods , Low Back Pain/therapy , Low Back Pain/surgery , Neurosciences , Pain Management/methods , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Preoperative Exercise , Quality of Life , Radiculopathy/surgery , Radiculopathy/therapy , Radiculopathy/rehabilitation , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome , Multicenter Studies as Topic
3.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0243917, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33362223

ABSTRACT

The aim of the present clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of neuromuscular versus classical strength-resistance training as part of a cardiac rehabilitation programme in patients following acute coronary syndrome. The study is designed as a double-blinded, randomised, and controlled clinical trial. Thirty participants suffering from acute coronary syndrome who meet our inclusion criteria will be recruited by a private tertiary hospital. The intervention group will follow 20 sessions of a cardiac rehabilitation programme divided into two parts: aerobic training and neuromuscular strength-resistance training. The control group will complete the same aerobic training as well as a classical strength-resistance training workout programme. The primary outcome of the study will be the mean difference in change from baseline in the Incremental Shuttle Walking Test. The secondary outcomes will be the cardiorespiratory fitness of the patients (assessed by means of the Chester Step Test), lower-limb performance (assessed with the 30-Second Chair Stand Test and Single-Leg Squat Test), lower-limb strength (hip flexor handheld dynamometry), sexual dysfunction assessment (Sex Health Inventory for Men) and quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). This work will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a neuromuscular versus a classic strength-training programme in terms of cardiorespiratory fitness, lower-limb performance capacities and quality of life, in cardiac patients. The data obtained could lead to more effective and functional workouts which, in turn, may enhance the speed at which these patients can return to their everyday activities of life and improve the efficiency of their movement patterns and heart responses. Furthermore, patients may find neuromuscular workout routines more motivating and engaging, thus encouraging them to adopt healthier lifestyle patterns.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/rehabilitation , Muscle Strength/physiology , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Resistance Training , Acute Coronary Syndrome/physiopathology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Exercise Test , Female , Humans , Lower Extremity/physiology , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Fitness/physiology , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
4.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 42(9): 627-634, 2017 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28441294

ABSTRACT

STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized parallel sham-controlled trial with concealed allocation and intention-to treat analysis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of an isolate myofascial release (MFR) protocol on pain, disability, and fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: MFR is a form of manual medicine widely used by physiotherapists in the management of different musculoskeletal pathologies. Up to this moment, no previous studies have reported the effects of an isolated MFR treatment in patients with CLBP. METHODS: Fifty-four participants, with nonspecific CLBP, were randomized to MFR group (n = 27) receiving four sessions of myofascial treatment, each lasting 40 minutes, and to control group (n = 27) receiving a sham MFR. Variables studied were pain measured by means Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and visual analog scale (VAS), disability measured with Roland Morris Questionnaire, and fear-avoidance beliefs measured with Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. RESULTS: Subjects receiving MFR displayed significant improvements in pain (SF-MPQ) (mean difference -7.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -14.5 to -1.1, P = 0.023) and sensory SF-MPQ subscale (mean difference -6.1; 95% CI: -10.8 to -1.5, P = 0.011) compared to the sham group, but no differences were found in VAS between groups. Disability and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire score also displayed a significant decrease in the MFR group (P < 0.05) as compared to sham MFR. CONCLUSION: MFR therapy produced a significant improvement in both pain and disability. Because the minimal clinically important differences in pain and disability are, however, included in the 95% CI, we cannot know whether this improvement is clinically relevant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.


Subject(s)
Chronic Pain/therapy , Low Back Pain/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities , Aged , Chronic Pain/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Low Back Pain/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL