4.3 Review

Evidence on Physical Activity and the Prevention of Frailty and Sarcopenia Among Older People: A Systematic Review to Inform the World Health Organization Physical Activity Guidelines

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY & HEALTH
卷 17, 期 12, 页码 1247-1258

出版社

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/jpah.2020-0323

关键词

exercise; aging; frail elderly

资金

  1. World Health Organization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Frailty and sarcopenia are common age-related conditions associated with adverse outcomes. Physical activity has been identified as a potential preventive strategy for both frailty and sarcopenia. The authors aimed to investigate the association between physical activity and prevention of frailty and sarcopenia in people aged 65 years and older. Methods: The authors searched for systematic reviews (January 2008 to November 2019) and individual studies (January 2010 to March 2020) in PubMed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials and longitudinal studies that investigated the effect of physical activity on frailty and/or sarcopenia in people aged 65 years and older. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate certainty of evidence. Results: Meta-analysis showed that physical activity probably prevents frailty (4 studies; frailty score pooled standardized mean difference, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.43; P =.017, I-2 = 57%, moderate certainty evidence). Only one trial investigated physical activity for sarcopenia prevention and did not provide conclusive evidence (risk ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-12.19). Five observational studies showed positive associations between physical activity and frailty or sarcopenia prevention. Conclusions: Physical activity probably prevents frailty among people aged 65 years and older. The impact of physical activity on the prevention of sarcopenia remains unknown, but observational studies indicate the preventive role of physical activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据