Loading…
The Role of Exercise in a Weight-Loss Program on Clinical Control in Obese Adults with Asthma. A Randomized Controlled Trial
Clinical control is difficult to achieve in obese patients with asthma. Bariatric surgery has been recommended for weight loss and to improve asthma control; however, the benefits of nonsurgical interventions have been poorly investigated. To examine the effect of exercise training in a weight-loss...
Saved in:
Published in: | American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine 2017-01, Vol.195 (1), p.32-42 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Clinical control is difficult to achieve in obese patients with asthma. Bariatric surgery has been recommended for weight loss and to improve asthma control; however, the benefits of nonsurgical interventions have been poorly investigated.
To examine the effect of exercise training in a weight-loss program on asthma control, quality of life, inflammatory biomarkers, and lung function.
Fifty-five obese patients with asthma were randomly assigned to either a weight-loss program plus exercise (WL + E group, n = 28) or a weight-loss program plus sham (WL + S group, n = 27), where the weight-loss program included nutrition (caloric restriction) and psychological therapies. The WL + E group incorporated aerobic and resistance muscle training, whereas the WL + S group incorporated breathing and stretching exercises.
The primary outcome was clinical improvement in asthma control over 3 months. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, lung function, body composition, aerobic capacity, muscle strength, and inflammatory/antiinflammatory biomarkers. After 3 months, 51 patients were analyzed. Compared with the WL + S group, the WL + E group demonstrated improved clinical control scores (median [25th to 75th percentile], -0.7 [-1.3 to -0.3] vs. -0.3 [-0.9 to 0.4]; P = 0.01) and greater weight loss (mean ± SD, -6.8% ± 3.5 vs. -3.1% ± 2.6; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1073-449X 1535-4970 |
DOI: | 10.1164/rccm.201603-0446OC |