Cargando…

Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to summarise and analyse the current literature about what progression criteria are applied in loading exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathies and their evidence and effectiveness. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and PEDro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Escriche-Escuder, Adrian, Casaña, Jose, Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33444210
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041433
_version_ 1783612143717842944
author Escriche-Escuder, Adrian
Casaña, Jose
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I
author_facet Escriche-Escuder, Adrian
Casaña, Jose
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I
author_sort Escriche-Escuder, Adrian
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to summarise and analyse the current literature about what progression criteria are applied in loading exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathies and their evidence and effectiveness. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and PEDro were searched from inception to 24 September 2020. The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials that included patients with midportion Achilles, patellar or gluteal tendinopathy; assessed function, pain or performance; included at least one group where progressive physical exercise was administered as monotherapy; included at least a control group. We excluded studies that included subjects with previous tendon surgical treatment; studies with control group that conducted a supplemented modality of the exercise performed in the intervention group. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Cohen’s d and the percentage of change of main clinical and performance outcomes were obtained. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. RESULTS: Thirty studies that described progression criteria were included. Six types of criteria grouped in two categories were identified and included in a new classification proposal: pain as a primary criterion (evoking and avoid-pain based), and pain and symptom control as a secondary criterion (conditioning stages, fatigue-based, subjective perception and temporary linear increase). Most of the studies applied a pain-based criterion. Criteria based on conditioning stages were also commonly applied. Other criteria such as fatigue, a temporary linear increase, or the subjective perception of the patient’s abilities were occasionally applied. CONCLUSIONS: There is a predominant use of pain-based criteria, but the utilisation of these criteria is not supported by strong evidence. This review evidences the need for studies that compare the same exercise programme using different progression criteria. A new classification of the existing progression criteria is proposed based on the use of pain as the primary or secondary criterion. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018110997.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7678382
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76783822020-11-30 Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review Escriche-Escuder, Adrian Casaña, Jose Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I BMJ Open Rehabilitation Medicine OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to summarise and analyse the current literature about what progression criteria are applied in loading exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathies and their evidence and effectiveness. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and PEDro were searched from inception to 24 September 2020. The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials that included patients with midportion Achilles, patellar or gluteal tendinopathy; assessed function, pain or performance; included at least one group where progressive physical exercise was administered as monotherapy; included at least a control group. We excluded studies that included subjects with previous tendon surgical treatment; studies with control group that conducted a supplemented modality of the exercise performed in the intervention group. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Cohen’s d and the percentage of change of main clinical and performance outcomes were obtained. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. RESULTS: Thirty studies that described progression criteria were included. Six types of criteria grouped in two categories were identified and included in a new classification proposal: pain as a primary criterion (evoking and avoid-pain based), and pain and symptom control as a secondary criterion (conditioning stages, fatigue-based, subjective perception and temporary linear increase). Most of the studies applied a pain-based criterion. Criteria based on conditioning stages were also commonly applied. Other criteria such as fatigue, a temporary linear increase, or the subjective perception of the patient’s abilities were occasionally applied. CONCLUSIONS: There is a predominant use of pain-based criteria, but the utilisation of these criteria is not supported by strong evidence. This review evidences the need for studies that compare the same exercise programme using different progression criteria. A new classification of the existing progression criteria is proposed based on the use of pain as the primary or secondary criterion. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018110997. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7678382/ /pubmed/33444210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041433 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Rehabilitation Medicine
Escriche-Escuder, Adrian
Casaña, Jose
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I
Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title_full Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title_fullStr Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title_short Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
title_sort load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review
topic Rehabilitation Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33444210
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041433
work_keys_str_mv AT escricheescuderadrian loadprogressioncriteriainexerciseprogrammesinlowerlimbtendinopathyasystematicreview
AT casanajose loadprogressioncriteriainexerciseprogrammesinlowerlimbtendinopathyasystematicreview
AT cuestavargasantonioi loadprogressioncriteriainexerciseprogrammesinlowerlimbtendinopathyasystematicreview