Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Interventions for promoting physical activity in people with cystic fibrosis

  1. Narelle S Cox1,*,
  2. Jennifer A Alison2,
  3. Anne E Holland1

Editorial Group: Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group

Published Online: 13 DEC 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 5 DEC 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009448.pub2


How to Cite

Cox NS, Alison JA, Holland AE. Interventions for promoting physical activity in people with cystic fibrosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD009448. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009448.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    La Trobe University, School of Physiotherapy, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

  2. 2

    The University of Sydney, Clinical and Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Lidcombe, Australia

*Narelle S Cox, School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Level 4 The Alfred Centre 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia. nscox@students.latrobe.edu.au.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New
  2. Published Online: 13 DEC 2013

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Study flow diagram.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 1 Participation in physical activity (MJ/day).
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 2 Change in quality of life.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 3 Change in exercise capacity (ml/kg/min).
[Analysis 1.4]
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 4 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).
[Analysis 1.5]
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 5 Change in FVC (% predicted).
[Analysis 1.6]
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 Supervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 6 Change in fat-free mass (kg).
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 1 Annual rate of change in exercise capacity (ml/kg/min) (follow up > 6 months).
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 2 Annual rate of decline FEV1 (% predicted) (follow up > 6 months).
[Analysis 2.3]
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 3 Change in FEV1 (% predicted).
[Analysis 2.4]
Analysis 2.4. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 4 Annual rate of decline FVC (% predicted) (follow up > 6 months).
[Analysis 2.5]
Analysis 2.5. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 5 Annual rate of decline FEF25-75 (% predicted) (follow up > 6 months).
[Analysis 2.6]
Analysis 2.6. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 6 Change in lean body mass (kg).
[Analysis 2.7]
Analysis 2.7. Comparison 2 Unsupervised exercise training compared to no intervention, Outcome 7 Change in skin fold measure (mm).