Author:

Keywords:

Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Cardiovascular System & Cardiology, blood pressure, hypertension, individual patient data meta-analysis, isometric exercise, HANDGRIP EXERCISE, SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS, RISK-ASSESSMENT, HYPERTENSION, MANAGEMENT, REDUCTIONS, PREVENTION, INTENSITY, DIAGNOSIS, MECHANISMS, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Exercise, Humans, Hypertension, Resistance Training, Rest, 1102 Cardiorespiratory Medicine and Haematology, 1103 Clinical Sciences, 1116 Medical Physiology, Cardiovascular System & Hematology, 3201 Cardiovascular medicine and haematology, 3202 Clinical sciences

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses based on aggregate group-level data report antihypertensive effects of isometric resistance training (IRT). However, individual participant data meta-analyses provide more robust effect size estimates and permit examination of demographic and clinical variables on IRT effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search and individual participant data (IPD) analysis, using both a one-step and two-step approach, of controlled trials investigating at least 3 weeks of IRT on resting systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure. RESULTS: Anonymized individual participant data were provided from 12 studies (14 intervention group comparisons) involving 326 participants (52.7% medicated for hypertension); 191 assigned to IRT and 135 controls, 25.2% of participants had diagnosed coronary artery disease. IRT intensity varied (8-30% MVC) and training duration ranged from 3 to 12 weeks. The IPD (one-step) meta-analysis showed a significant treatment effect for the exercise group participants experiencing a reduction in resting SBP of -6.22 mmHg (95% CI -7.75 to -4.68; P < 0.00001); DBP of -2.78 mmHg (95% CI -3.92 to -1.65; P = 0.002); and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) of -4.12 mmHg (95% CI -5.39 to -2.85; P < 0.00001). The two-step approach yielded similar results for change in SBP -7.35 mmHg (-8.95 to -5.75; P < 0.00001), DBP MD -3.29 mmHg (95% CI -5.12 to -1.46; P = 0.0004) and MAP MD -4.63 mmHg (95% CI -6.18 to -3.09: P < 0.00001). Sub-analysis revealed that neither clinical, medication, nor demographic participant characteristics, or exercise program features, modified the IRT treatment effect. CONCLUSION: This individual patient analysis confirms a clinically meaningful and statistically significant effect of IRT on resting SBP, DBP and mean arterial blood pressure.