Precision Of Exercise Prescription In Oncology: An Updated Systematic Review Of The Implementation Of Resistance Training Principles

Though there is evidence that resistance training can improve health outcomes in cancer, the effectiveness of these interventions may be diminished through improper application/reporting of exercise prescription principles (i.e. progression and overload). PURPOSE: To update our prior review evaluating the reporting of the key principles of exercise training (specificity, progression, overload) and their quality. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted across the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO) and SPORTDiscus, identifying studies published from June 2016-May 2023. RCT’s of resistance exercise in individuals with cancer following treatment were eligible for inclusion. Data was extracted regarding reporting of principles of training. “Yes” or “No” was assigned to studies that reported use of a principle or not, respectively. Further, quality of reporting was ranked on a 3-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 = low (i.e. brief/vague mention of principle) to 3 = high (i.e. clear/detailed reporting of the principle). A chi-square analysis was used to compare the proportion of studies that reported these principles in this review compared to our prior review. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies were identified and included in this review. A significant increase in the percentage of studies that reported progression (65% vs. 91%, p < 0.05) was found for studies published after May 2016 compared to older studies. There was no statistically significant change in overload (74% vs 76%) and specificity (94% vs 100%). The quality assessment for progression is as follows: 31% low, 31 % moderate, and 38% high whereas overload reported: 35% low, 23% moderate, and 42% high. CONCLUSION: Though reporting certain exercise prescription principles has improved from our prior review, the quality of reporting remains low-moderate. Better detail in reporting exercise prescription principles is critical to improve the interpretation of exercise oncology study results.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001062128.79290.06
Primary Topic
Cancer survivorship and care
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Precision Of Exercise Prescription In Oncology: An Updated Systematic Review Of The Implementation Of Resistance Training Principles

Shana Harrington, Ciaran M. Fairman, Olivia R. Kocuba, Alexander M. Brooks et al.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Cancer survivorship and care
article

Precision Of Exercise Prescription In Oncology: An Updated Systematic Review Of The Implementation Of Resistance Training Principles

Shana Harrington, Ciaran M. Fairman, Olivia R. Kocuba, Alexander M. Brooks, Kylah E. Jackson, Kenneth S. Anderson
article en

Abstract

Though there is evidence that resistance training can improve health outcomes in cancer, the effectiveness of these interventions may be diminished through improper application/reporting of exercise prescription principles (i.e. progression and overload). PURPOSE: To update our prior review evaluating the reporting of the key principles of exercise training (specificity, progression, overload) and their quality. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted across the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO) and SPORTDiscus, identifying studies published from June 2016-May 2023. RCT’s of resistance exercise in individuals with cancer following treatment were eligible for inclusion. Data was extracted regarding reporting of principles of training. “Yes” or “No” was assigned to studies that reported use of a principle or not, respectively. Further, quality of reporting was ranked on a 3-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 = low (i.e. brief/vague mention of principle) to 3 = high (i.e. clear/detailed reporting of the principle). A chi-square analysis was used to compare the proportion of studies that reported these principles in this review compared to our prior review. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies were identified and included in this review. A significant increase in the percentage of studies that reported progression (65% vs. 91%, p < 0.05) was found for studies published after May 2016 compared to older studies. There was no statistically significant change in overload (74% vs 76%) and specificity (94% vs 100%). The quality assessment for progression is as follows: 31% low, 31 % moderate, and 38% high whereas overload reported: 35% low, 23% moderate, and 42% high. CONCLUSION: Though reporting certain exercise prescription principles has improved from our prior review, the quality of reporting remains low-moderate. Better detail in reporting exercise prescription principles is critical to improve the interpretation of exercise oncology study results.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
University of South Carolina (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Cancer survivorship and care
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.