Background Patients with Heart Failure (HF) show impaired functional capacities which have been related to their prognosis. Moreover, physical functional performance in functional tests has also been related to the prognosis in patients with HF. Thus, it would be useful to investigate how physical functional performance in functional tests could determine the prognosis in patients with HF, because HF is the leading cause of hospital admissions for people older than 65 years old. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarise and synthesise the evidence published about the relationship between physical functional performance and prognosis in patients with HF, as well as assess the risk of bias of included studies and the level of evidence per outcome. Methods Major electronic databases, such as PubMed, AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, Web of Science, were searched from inception to March 2020 for observational longitudinal cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) examining the relationship between physical functional performance and prognosis in patients with HF. Results 44 observational longitudinal cohort studies with a total of 22,598 patients with HF were included. 26 included studies reported a low risk of bias, and 17 included studies showed a moderate risk of bias. Patients with poor physical functional performance in the Six Minute Walking Test (6MWT), in the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and in the Gait Speed Test showed worse prognosis in terms of larger risk of hospitalisation or mortality than patients with good physical functional performance. However, there was a lack of homogeneity regarding which cut-off points should be used to stratify patients with poor physical functional performance from patients with good physical functional performance. Conclusion The review includes a large number of studies which show a strong relationship between physical functional performance and prognosis in patients with HF. Most of the included studies reported a low risk of bias, and GRADE criteria showed a low and a moderate level of evidence per outcome.

No abstract

Background a systematic review in 2015 showed kinematic gait and balance parameters which can discriminate patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from cognitively healthy individuals. Objective this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarise and synthesise the evidence published after the previous review about the functional objective parameters obtained by an instrumented kinematic assessment which could discriminate patients with MCI from cognitively healthy individuals, as well as to assess the level of evidence per outcome. Methods major electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2019 for cross-sectional studies published after 2015 examining kinematic gait and balance parameters, which may discriminate patients with MCI from cognitively healthy individuals. Meta-analysis was carried out for each parameter reported in two or more studies. Results Ten cross-sectional studies with a total of 1,405 patients with MCI and 2,277 cognitively healthy individuals were included. Eight of the included studies reported a low risk of bias. Patients with MCI showed a slower gait speed than cognitively healthy individuals. Thus, single-task gait speed (d = −0.44, 95%CI [−0.60 to −0.28]; P < 0.001), gait speed at fast pace (d = −0.48, 95%CI [−0.72 to −0.24]; P < 0.001) and arithmetic dual-task gait speed (d = −1.20, 95%CI [−2.12 to −0.28]; P = 0.01) were the functional objective parameters which best discriminated both groups. Conclusion the present review shows kinematic gait parameters which may discriminate patients with MCI from cognitively healthy individuals. Most of the included studies reported a low risk of bias, but the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation criteria showed a low level of evidence per outcome.