Exercising in high environmental temperatures may cause precocious hyperthermia induced fatigue resulting in a decreased athletes’ performance output. This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the possib...Exercising in high environmental temperatures may cause precocious hyperthermia induced fatigue resulting in a decreased athletes’ performance output. This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the possible effects of pre-exercise cooling on performance output. This study was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines and the PICO-model was used to establish the research question. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was applied to assess the validity of the included studies. Study eligibility was given when the studies compared the effects between any kind of pre-cooling and non-cooling strategies prior to exercise on performance output. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. Risk of bias was high or unclear but the performance bias was low. The estimated standardized mean difference revealed that external pre-cooling (21 studies) enhanced performance (Hedges’ g = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.33 to 0.64]), with the main effect observed in endurance cycling or running. Internal (7 studies) and mixed-method (5 studies) pre-cooling failed to significantly affect performance parameters. However, the main output parameter, evaluated in these studies, was peak power output. Subgroup analysis for different outcome measures was not possible because meaningful grouping was not plausible. Limitations of this meta-analysis were the high or unclear risk of bias and the comparability of the included studies. Future studies should also determine the effects of different pre-cooling applications on female and untrained participants. Based on the results of this meta-analysis, it can be concluded that there is some evidence in favour of external pre-cooling to avoid precocious hyperthermia induced fatigue in endurance athletes exercising in hot environments.展开更多
Thermal therapy is frequently used as an adjunct to treatment in patients suffering from chronic low back pain. It is also an inherent part of patients’ self-administered pain treatment. This review aims to update th...Thermal therapy is frequently used as an adjunct to treatment in patients suffering from chronic low back pain. It is also an inherent part of patients’ self-administered pain treatment. This review aims to update the evidence for thermal therapy treatments in non-specific chronic low back pain patients and to rate the methodological quality of the corresponding clinical trials. Previous studies have reported contradictory evidence for the effectiveness of thermal therapy. An electronic search on MEDLINE (PubMed), PEDro, CENTRAL and CINHAL databases was conducted between May 2016 and February 2018. Clinical trials comparing local thermal therapy to conservative or no treatment were assessed for eligibility. Pain, physical function and global health were defined as outcome parameters. A total of n = 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them applied an electrophysical agent as the thermal treatment: continuous ultrasound (n = 6), short-wave diathermy (n = 2), microwave diathermy (n = 1). Out of the n = 6 studies on ultrasound treatment, n = 2 reported significant within and between-group results for pain reduction after 4 to 6 weeks of treatment. Both short-wave diathermy studies demonstrated significant between-group results for pain reduction after 3 weeks of treatment. Contradictory results for all other observed outcome parameters were reported regardless of the intervention. Moreover, significant within-group results for the control groups questioned the effectiveness of the intervention treatments. Therefore, the effect of thermal therapy, (electrophysical agents), is not superior to any control treatment except for ultrasound treatment on short-term pain reduction.展开更多
文摘Exercising in high environmental temperatures may cause precocious hyperthermia induced fatigue resulting in a decreased athletes’ performance output. This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the possible effects of pre-exercise cooling on performance output. This study was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines and the PICO-model was used to establish the research question. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was applied to assess the validity of the included studies. Study eligibility was given when the studies compared the effects between any kind of pre-cooling and non-cooling strategies prior to exercise on performance output. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. Risk of bias was high or unclear but the performance bias was low. The estimated standardized mean difference revealed that external pre-cooling (21 studies) enhanced performance (Hedges’ g = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.33 to 0.64]), with the main effect observed in endurance cycling or running. Internal (7 studies) and mixed-method (5 studies) pre-cooling failed to significantly affect performance parameters. However, the main output parameter, evaluated in these studies, was peak power output. Subgroup analysis for different outcome measures was not possible because meaningful grouping was not plausible. Limitations of this meta-analysis were the high or unclear risk of bias and the comparability of the included studies. Future studies should also determine the effects of different pre-cooling applications on female and untrained participants. Based on the results of this meta-analysis, it can be concluded that there is some evidence in favour of external pre-cooling to avoid precocious hyperthermia induced fatigue in endurance athletes exercising in hot environments.
文摘Thermal therapy is frequently used as an adjunct to treatment in patients suffering from chronic low back pain. It is also an inherent part of patients’ self-administered pain treatment. This review aims to update the evidence for thermal therapy treatments in non-specific chronic low back pain patients and to rate the methodological quality of the corresponding clinical trials. Previous studies have reported contradictory evidence for the effectiveness of thermal therapy. An electronic search on MEDLINE (PubMed), PEDro, CENTRAL and CINHAL databases was conducted between May 2016 and February 2018. Clinical trials comparing local thermal therapy to conservative or no treatment were assessed for eligibility. Pain, physical function and global health were defined as outcome parameters. A total of n = 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them applied an electrophysical agent as the thermal treatment: continuous ultrasound (n = 6), short-wave diathermy (n = 2), microwave diathermy (n = 1). Out of the n = 6 studies on ultrasound treatment, n = 2 reported significant within and between-group results for pain reduction after 4 to 6 weeks of treatment. Both short-wave diathermy studies demonstrated significant between-group results for pain reduction after 3 weeks of treatment. Contradictory results for all other observed outcome parameters were reported regardless of the intervention. Moreover, significant within-group results for the control groups questioned the effectiveness of the intervention treatments. Therefore, the effect of thermal therapy, (electrophysical agents), is not superior to any control treatment except for ultrasound treatment on short-term pain reduction.
