Supervised exercise therapy versus home-based exercise therapy versus walking advice for intermittent claudication

David Hageman, Hugo Jp Fokkenrood, Lindy Nm Gommans, Marijn Ml van den Houten, Joep Aw Teijink, David Hageman, Hugo Jp Fokkenrood, Lindy Nm Gommans, Marijn Ml van den Houten, Joep Aw Teijink

Abstract

Background: Although supervised exercise therapy (SET) provides significant symptomatic benefit for patients with intermittent claudication (IC), it remains an underutilized tool. Widespread implementation of SET is restricted by lack of facilities and funding. Structured home-based exercise therapy (HBET) with an observation component (e.g., exercise logbooks, pedometers) and just walking advice (WA) are alternatives to SET. This is the second update of a review first published in 2006.

Objectives: The primary objective was to provide an accurate overview of studies evaluating effects of SET programs, HBET programs, and WA on maximal treadmill walking distance or time (MWD/T) for patients with IC. Secondary objectives were to evaluate effects of SET, HBET, and WA on pain-free treadmill walking distance or time (PFWD/T), quality of life, and self-reported functional impairment.

Search methods: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (December 16, 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2016, Issue 11). We searched the reference lists of relevant studies identified through searches for other potential trials. We applied no restriction on language of publication.

Selection criteria: We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials comparing SET programs with HBET programs and WA in participants with IC. We excluded studies in which control groups did not receive exercise or walking advice (maintained normal physical activity). We also excluded studies comparing exercise with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, bypass surgery, or drug therapy.

Data collection and analysis: Three review authors (DH, HF, and LG) independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed trials for risk of bias. Two other review authors (MvdH and JT) confirmed the suitability and methodological quality of trials. For all continuous outcomes, we extracted the number of participants, mean outcome, and standard deviation for each treatment group through the follow-up period, if available. We extracted Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 outcomes to assess quality of life, and Walking Impairment Questionnaire outcomes to assess self-reported functional impairment. As investigators used different scales to present results of walking distance and time, we standardized reported data to effect sizes to enable calculation of an overall standardized mean difference (SMD). We obtained summary estimates for all outcome measures using a random-effects model. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.

Main results: For this update, we included seven additional studies, making a total of 21 included studies, which involved a total of 1400 participants: 635 received SET, 320 received HBET, and 445 received WA. In general, SET and HBET programs consisted of three exercise sessions per week. Follow-up ranged from six weeks to two years. Most trials used a treadmill walking test to investigate effects of exercise therapy on walking capacity. However, two trials assessed only quality of life, functional impairment, and/or walking behavior (i.e., daily steps measured by pedometer). The overall methodological quality of included trials was moderate to good. However, some trials were small with respect to numbers of participants, ranging from 20 to 304.SET groups showed clear improvement in MWD/T compared with HBET and WA groups, with overall SMDs at three months of 0.37 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 0.62; P = 0.004; moderate-quality evidence) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.53 to 1.07; P < 0.00001; high-quality evidence), respectively. This translates to differences in increased MWD of approximately 120 and 210 meters in favor of SET groups. Data show improvements for up to six and 12 months, respectively. The HBET group did not show improvement in MWD/T compared with the WA group (SMD 0.30, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.05; P = 0.43; moderate-quality evidence).Compared with HBET, SET was more beneficial for PFWD/T but had no effect on quality of life parameters nor on self-reported functional impairment. Compared with WA, SET was more beneficial for PFWD/T and self-reported functional impairment, as well as for some quality of life parameters (e.g., physical functioning, pain, and physical component summary after 12 months), and HBET had no effect.Data show no obvious effects on mortality rates. Thirteen of the 1400 participants died, but no deaths were related to exercise therapy. Overall, adherence to SET was approximately 80%, which was similar to that reported with HBET. Only limited adherence data were available for WA groups.

Authors' conclusions: Evidence of moderate and high quality shows that SET provides an important benefit for treadmill-measured walking distance (MWD and PFWD) compared with HBET and WA, respectively. Although its clinical relevance has not been definitively demonstrated, this benefit translates to increased MWD of 120 and 210 meters after three months in SET groups. These increased walking distances are likely to have a positive impact on the lives of patients with IC. Data provide no clear evidence of a difference between HBET and WA. Trials show no clear differences in quality of life parameters nor in self-reported functional impairment between SET and HBET. However, evidence is of low and very low quality, respectively. Investigators detected some improvements in quality of life favoring SET over WA, but analyses were limited by small numbers of studies and participants. Future studies should focus on disease-specific quality of life and other functional outcomes, such as walking behavior and physical activity, as well as on long-term follow-up.

Conflict of interest statement

David Hageman: none known. Hugo JP Fokkenrood: none known. Lindy NM Gommans: none known. Marijn ML van den Houten: none known. Joep AW Teijink: none known.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 1 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 weeks.
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 2 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 3 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
1.4. Analysis
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 4 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
1.5. Analysis
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 5 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
1.6. Analysis
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 6 Short Form 36/20 physical functioning after 3 months.
1.7. Analysis
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 7 Short Form 36 role physical after 3 months.
1.8. Analysis
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 8 Short Form 36 role emotional after 3 months.
1.9. Analysis
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 9 Short Form 36 vitality after 3 months.
1.10. Analysis
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 10 Short Form 36/20 emotional well‐being after 3 months.
1.11. Analysis
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 11 Short Form 36/20 social functioning after 3 months.
1.12. Analysis
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 12 Short Form 36 pain after 3 months.
1.13. Analysis
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 13 Short Form 36/20 general health after 3 months.
1.14. Analysis
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 14 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 3 months.
1.15. Analysis
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 15 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 3 months.
1.16. Analysis
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 16 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 6 months.
1.17. Analysis
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 17 Short Form 36 role physical after 6 months.
1.18. Analysis
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 18 Short Form 36 role emotional after 6 months.
1.19. Analysis
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 19 Short Form 36 vitality after 6 months.
1.20. Analysis
1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 20 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 6 months.
1.21. Analysis
1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 21 Short Form 36 social functioning after 6 months.
1.22. Analysis
1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 22 Short Form 36 pain after 6 months.
1.23. Analysis
1.23. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 23 Short Form 36 general health after 6 months.
1.24. Analysis
1.24. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 24 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 6 months.
1.25. Analysis
1.25. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 25 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 6 months.
1.26. Analysis
1.26. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 26 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 3 months.
1.27. Analysis
1.27. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 27 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 3 months.
1.28. Analysis
1.28. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 28 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 3 months.
1.29. Analysis
1.29. Analysis
Comparison 1 Supervised exercise therapy versus home‐based exercise therapy, Outcome 29 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 3 months.
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 1 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 weeks.
2.2. Analysis
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 2 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
2.3. Analysis
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 3 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
2.4. Analysis
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 4 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 9 months.
2.5. Analysis
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 5 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 12 months.
2.6. Analysis
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 6 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 6 weeks.
2.7. Analysis
2.7. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 7 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
2.8. Analysis
2.8. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 8 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
2.9. Analysis
2.9. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 9 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 9 months.
2.10. Analysis
2.10. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 10 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 12 months.
2.11. Analysis
2.11. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 11 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 6 weeks.
2.12. Analysis
2.12. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 12 Short Form 36 role physical after 6 weeks.
2.13. Analysis
2.13. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 13 Short Form 36 role emotional after 6 weeks.
2.14. Analysis
2.14. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 14 Short Form 36 vitality after 6 weeks.
2.15. Analysis
2.15. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 15 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 6 weeks.
2.16. Analysis
2.16. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 16 Short Form 36 social functioning after 6 weeks.
2.17. Analysis
2.17. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 17 Short Form 36 pain after 6 weeks.
2.18. Analysis
2.18. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 18 Short Form 36 general health after 6 weeks.
2.19. Analysis
2.19. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 19 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 6 weeks.
2.20. Analysis
2.20. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 20 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 6 weeks.
2.21. Analysis
2.21. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 21 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 3 months.
2.22. Analysis
2.22. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 22 Short Form 36 role physical after 3 months.
2.23. Analysis
2.23. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 23 Short Form 36 role emotional after 3 months.
2.24. Analysis
2.24. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 24 Short Form 36 vitality after 3 months.
2.25. Analysis
2.25. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 25 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 3 months.
2.26. Analysis
2.26. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 26 Short Form 36 social functioning after 3 months.
2.27. Analysis
2.27. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 27 Short Form 36 pain after 3 months.
2.28. Analysis
2.28. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 28 Short Form 36 general health after 3 months.
2.29. Analysis
2.29. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 29 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 3 months.
2.30. Analysis
2.30. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 30 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 3 months.
2.31. Analysis
2.31. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 31 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 6 months.
2.32. Analysis
2.32. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 32 Short Form 36 role physical after 6 months.
2.33. Analysis
2.33. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 33 Short Form 36 role emotional after 6 months.
2.34. Analysis
2.34. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 34 Short Form 36 vitality after 6 months.
2.35. Analysis
2.35. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 35 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 6 months.
2.36. Analysis
2.36. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 36 Short Form 36 social functioning after 6 months.
2.37. Analysis
2.37. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 37 Short Form 36 pain after 6 months.
2.38. Analysis
2.38. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 38 Short Form 36 general health after 6 months.
2.39. Analysis
2.39. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 39 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 6 months.
2.40. Analysis
2.40. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 40 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 6 months.
2.41. Analysis
2.41. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 41 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 9 months.
2.42. Analysis
2.42. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 42 Short Form 36 role physical after 9 months.
2.43. Analysis
2.43. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 43 Short Form 36 role emotional after 9 months.
2.44. Analysis
2.44. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 44 Short Form 36 vitality after 9 months.
2.45. Analysis
2.45. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 45 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 9 months.
2.46. Analysis
2.46. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 46 Short Form 36 social functioning after 9 months.
2.47. Analysis
2.47. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 47 Short Form 36 pain after 9 months.
2.48. Analysis
2.48. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 48 Short Form 36 general health after 9 months.
2.49. Analysis
2.49. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 49 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 9 months.
2.50. Analysis
2.50. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 50 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 9 months.
2.51. Analysis
2.51. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 51 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 12 months.
2.52. Analysis
2.52. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 52 Short Form 36 role physical after 12 months.
2.53. Analysis
2.53. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 53 Short Form 36 role emotional after 12 months.
2.54. Analysis
2.54. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 54 Short Form 36 vitality after 12 months.
2.55. Analysis
2.55. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 55 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 12 months.
2.56. Analysis
2.56. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 56 Short Form 36 social functioning after 12 months.
2.57. Analysis
2.57. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 57 Short Form 36 pain after 12 months.
2.58. Analysis
2.58. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 58 Short Form 36 general health after 12 months.
2.59. Analysis
2.59. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 59 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 12 months.
2.60. Analysis
2.60. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 60 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 12 months.
2.61. Analysis
2.61. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 61 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 6 weeks.
2.62. Analysis
2.62. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 62 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 6 weeks.
2.63. Analysis
2.63. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 63 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 6 weeks.
2.64. Analysis
2.64. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 64 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 6 weeks.
2.65. Analysis
2.65. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 65 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 3 months.
2.66. Analysis
2.66. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 66 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 3 months.
2.67. Analysis
2.67. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 67 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 3 months.
2.68. Analysis
2.68. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 68 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 3 months.
2.69. Analysis
2.69. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 69 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 6 months.
2.70. Analysis
2.70. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 70 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 6 months.
2.71. Analysis
2.71. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 71 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 6 months.
2.72. Analysis
2.72. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 72 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 6 months.
2.73. Analysis
2.73. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 73 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 9 months.
2.74. Analysis
2.74. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 74 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 9 months.
2.75. Analysis
2.75. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 75 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 9 months.
2.76. Analysis
2.76. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 76 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 9 months.
2.77. Analysis
2.77. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 77 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 12 months.
2.78. Analysis
2.78. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 78 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 12 months.
2.79. Analysis
2.79. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 79 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 12 months.
2.80. Analysis
2.80. Analysis
Comparison 2 Supervised exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 80 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 12 months.
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 1 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 weeks.
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 2 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
3.3. Analysis
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 3 Maximal treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
3.4. Analysis
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 4 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 3 months.
3.5. Analysis
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 5 Pain‐free treadmill walking distance after 6 months.
3.6. Analysis
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 6 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 3 months.
3.7. Analysis
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 7 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 3 months.
3.8. Analysis
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 8 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 3 months.
3.9. Analysis
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 9 Short Form 36 physical functioning after 6 months.
3.10. Analysis
3.10. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 10 Short Form 36 role physical after 6 months.
3.11. Analysis
3.11. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 11 Short Form 36 role emotional after 6 months.
3.12. Analysis
3.12. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 12 Short Form 36 vitality after 6 months.
3.13. Analysis
3.13. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 13 Short Form 36 emotional well‐being after 6 months.
3.14. Analysis
3.14. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 14 Short Form 36 social functioning after 6 months.
3.15. Analysis
3.15. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 15 Short Form 36 pain after 6 months.
3.16. Analysis
3.16. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 16 Short Form 36 general health after 6 months.
3.17. Analysis
3.17. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 17 Short Form 36 physical component summary after 6 months.
3.18. Analysis
3.18. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 18 Short Form 36 mental component summary after 6 months.
3.19. Analysis
3.19. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 19 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 3 months.
3.20. Analysis
3.20. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 20 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 3 months.
3.21. Analysis
3.21. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 21 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 3 months.
3.22. Analysis
3.22. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 22 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 3 months.
3.23. Analysis
3.23. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 23 Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance after 6 months.
3.24. Analysis
3.24. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 24 Walking Impairment Questionnaire speed after 6 months.
3.25. Analysis
3.25. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 25 Walking Impairment Questionnaire stairs after 6 months.
3.26. Analysis
3.26. Analysis
Comparison 3 Home‐based exercise therapy versus walking advice, Outcome 26 Walking Impairment Questionnaire combined after 6 months.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe