Exercise on prescription in general practice: A systematic review

被引:117
|
作者
Sorensen, JB
Skovgaard, T
Puggaard, L
机构
[1] Univ So Denmark, Inst Sports Sci & Clin Biomech, Ctr Appl & Clin Exercise Sci, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark
[2] Univ So Denmark, Res Unit Gen Practice, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark
[3] Univ So Denmark, Inst Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Promot Res, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark
关键词
exercise on prescription; exercise therapy; family practice; health technology assessment; systematic review;
D O I
10.1080/02813430600700027
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
'Exercise on Prescription' ( EoP) is used for initiating physical activity among sedentary patients with signs of lifestyle diseases. EoP is personalized secondary prevention in primary healthcare. This review addresses EoP using a Health Technology Assessment perspective and aims to answer the following questions: ( 1) Does EoP increase physical activity level or physical fitness, and is more intensive EoP more effective than less intensive? ( 2) Is EoP acceptable and feasible in general practice? ( 3) Is EoP acceptable to and feasible for sedentary patients? ( 4) Is EoP cost-effective? EoP studies were searched using Medline thesaurus topic, Medline WinSPIRS, reference lists of recent reviews, and NLM Gateway Locator plus. A total of 22 studies were included in the review. Most studies reported moderate improvements in physical activity or physical fitness for 6 - 12 months. Among patients receiving EoP 10% more had improved physical activity level compared with controls and mean aerobic fitness was improved by 5 - 10% among EoP patients compared with controls. Little evidence existed in support of the hypthesis that more intensive EoP is more effective. EoP was acceptable and feasible to GPs and patients volunteering for EoP. However, little is known about non-completers, patients declining EoP, and GPs not highly motivated for using EoP. Only one study addressed health economic issues. It found EoP cost-effective, but comparisons with other interventions have not been performed. Even though most studies in this review presented favourable results for EoP there is a lack of evidence in several fields. In particular we lack high-quality studies evaluating EoP schemes that are sustainable in everyday use in general practice.
引用
收藏
页码:69 / 74
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A systematic review of experiences of advanced practice nursing in general practice
    Jakimowicz, Michael
    Williams, Danielle
    Stankiewicz, Grazyna
    BMC NURSING, 2017, 16
  • [22] Prescription of Exercise Programs for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Systematic Review
    Ataide, Sofia S.
    Ferreira, Jose P.
    Campos, Maria J.
    JOURNAL OF AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS, 2024,
  • [23] Systematic Review of Aerobic Exercise Training Prescription for Individuals with Migraines: A Proposal
    de Oliveira, A. B.
    Ribeiro, R. T.
    Carvalho, D. S.
    Peres, M. F. P.
    HEADACHE, 2012, 52 (06): : 1058 - 1058
  • [24] The use of periodized exercise prescription in rehabilitation: a systematic scoping review of literature
    Boggenpoel, Blake Yale
    Nel, Stephan
    Hanekom, Susan
    CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 2018, 32 (09) : 1235 - 1248
  • [25] EXERCISE PRESCRIPTION IN MEDICAL-PRACTICE
    VUORI, I
    ANNALS OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 1988, 20 (1-2): : 84 - 93
  • [26] Core Stabilization Exercise Prescription, Part 2: A Systematic Review of Motor Control and General (Global) Exercise Rehabilitation Approaches for Patients With Low Back Pain
    Brumitt, Jason
    Matheson, J. W.
    Meira, Erik P.
    SPORTS HEALTH-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH, 2013, 5 (06): : 510 - 513
  • [27] Nutritional deficiency in general practice: a systematic review - Discussion
    Kolasa
    Van Wayenburg
    Helman
    Pond
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 2005, 59 : S88 - S88
  • [28] Management of gout in general practice-a systematic review
    Jeyaruban, Andrew
    Larkins, Sarah
    Soden, Muriel
    CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 2015, 34 (01) : 9 - 16
  • [29] Barriers to spirometry in Australian general practice: A systematic review
    Lim, R.
    Smith, T.
    Usherwood, T.
    RESPIROLOGY, 2022, 27 : 193 - 193
  • [30] Inequalities in general practice remote consultations: a systematic review
    Parker, Ruth F.
    Figures, Emma L.
    Paddison, Charlotte A. M.
    Matheson, James I. D. M.
    Blane, David N.
    Ford, John A.
    BJGP OPEN, 2021, 5 (03) : 1 - 12