Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

The effect of mat Pilates training combined with aerobic exercise versus mat Pilates training alone on blood pressure in women with hypertension: a randomized controlled trial [with consumer summary]
da Silva Almeida I, de Souza Andrade L, Melo de Sousa AM, Junior GC, Turri-Silva N, da Cunha Nascimento D, Lima Mota Y, Quagliotti Durigan JL
PTJ: Physical Therapy & Rehabilitation Journal 2022 Feb;102(2):pzab258
clinical trial
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of mat Pilates (MP) versus MP plus aerobic exercise (AE) compared with the effects of no intervention on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in women with hypertension. METHODS: This 3-arm, parallel-group randomized clinical trial assessed 60 women who had hypertension and were 30 to 59 years old. The intervention lasted 16 weeks, and the participants were allocated into 3 groups: MP only (MP group), MP with alternating bouts of AE on a treadmill (MP+AE group), and control group (CG) with no exercises. Primary outcomes were the effects of the interventions on ambulatory BP assessed in the 24-hour, awake, and asleep periods of analysis. RESULTS: A 2-way analysis of variance did not reveal statistically significant differences in between-group comparisons in the 24-hour period of analysis for systolic BP (CG versus MP 3.3 (95% CI -7.1 to 13.8); MP versus MP+AE 0.7 (95% CI -4 to 5.4); CG versus MP+AE 4.0 (95% CI -5.2 to 13.4)), diastolic BP (CG versus MP 2.2 (95% CI -5.6 to 10.0); MP versus MP+AE 1.1 (95% CI -4.3 to 6.5); CG versus MP+AE 3.3 (95% CI -3.8 to 10.4)), and heart rate (CG versus MP 3.4 (95% CI -2 to 8.8); MP versus MP+AE 2.0 (95% CI -3.4 to 7.5); CG versus MP+AE 5.4 (95% CI -0.8 to 11.8)). The awake and asleep periods of analyses also showed similar behavior and did not reveal statistically significant between-group differences. Furthermore, in the responsiveness analysis based on the minimal clinically important difference, no differences were observed between groups. CONCLUSION: The magnitudes of the decrease in systolic BP during the 24-hour period of analysis were -3 and -5.48 mmHg for the MP and MP+AE groups, without differences for responsiveness between groups. The results suggest that MP supplemented with AE or not may be an alternative adjuvant treatment for women who have hypertension and are using antihypertension medication.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help