The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis [International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017055619] was to assess the effects of strict prolonged bed rest (without countermeasures) on maximal oxygen uptake (V̇o) and to explore sources of variation therein. Since 1949, 80 studies with a total of 949 participants (>90% men) have been published with data on strict bed rest and V̇o The studies were conducted mainly in young participants [median age (interquartile range) 24.5 (22.4-34.0) yr]. The duration of bed rest ranged from 1 to 90 days. V̇o declined linearly across bed rest duration. No statistical difference in the decline among studies reporting V̇o as l/min (-0.3% per day) compared with studies reporting V̇o normalized to body weight (ml·kg·min; -0.43% per day) was observed. Although both total body weight and lean body mass declined in response to bed rest, we did not see any associations with the decline in V̇o However, 15-26% of the variation in the decline in V̇o was explained by the pre-bed-rest V̇o levels, independent of the duration of bed rest (i.e., higher pre-bed-rest V̇o levels were associated with larger declines in V̇o). Furthermore, the systematic review revealed a gap in the knowledge about the cardiovascular response to extreme physical inactivity, particularly in older subjects and women of any age group. In addition to its relevance to spaceflight, this lack of data has significant translational implications because younger women sometimes undergo prolonged periods of bed rest associated with the complications of pregnancy and the incidence of hospitalization including prolonged periods of bed rest increases with age. Large interindividual responses of maximal oxygen uptake (V̇o) to aerobic exercise training exist. However, less is known about the variability in the response of V̇o to prolonged bed rest. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that pre-bed-rest V̇o values were inversely associated with the change in V̇o independent of the duration of bed rest. Moreover, we identified a large knowledge gap about the causes of decline in V̇o, particularly in postmenopausal women, which may have clinical implications.
Persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) is a common complication of surgery that significantly affects quality of life. A better understanding of which patients are likely to develop PPSP would help to identify when perioperative and postoperative pain management may require specific attention. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) of a patient’s preoperative pain perception is associated with acute postoperative pain, and acute postoperative pain is a risk factor for PPSP. The direct association between preoperative QST and PPSP has not been reviewed to date. In this systematic review, we assessed the relationship of preoperative QST to PPSP. We searched databases with components related to (1) preoperative QST; (2) association testing; and (3) PPSP. Two authors reviewed all titles and abstracts for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) QST performed before surgery; (2) PPSP assessed ≥3 months postoperatively; and (3) the association between QST measures and PPSP is investigated. The search retrieved 905 articles; 24 studies with 2732 subjects met inclusion criteria. Most studies (22/24) had moderate to high risk of bias in multiple quality domains. Fourteen (58%) studies reported a significant association between preoperative QST and PPSP. Preoperative temporal summation of pain (4 studies), conditioned pain modulation (3 studies), and pressure pain threshold (3 studies) showed the most frequent association with PPSP. The strength of the association between preoperative QST and PPSP varied from weak to strong. Preoperative QST is variably associated with PPSP. Measurements related to central processing of pain may be most consistently associated with PPSP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.