↓ Skip to main content

Safety, adherence and efficacy of exercise training in solid-organ transplant candidates: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Transplantation Reviews, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety, adherence and efficacy of exercise training in solid-organ transplant candidates: A systematic review
Published in
Transplantation Reviews, July 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.trre.2016.07.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew P. Wallen, Tina L. Skinner, Toby G. Pavey, Adrian Hall, Graeme A. Macdonald, Jeff S. Coombes

Abstract

Patients awaiting solid-organ transplantation may be encouraged to undertake exercise training to improve pre- and post-transplant outcomes. However, the safety, adherence and efficacy of exercise training in this population remain unclear. All randomized, non-randomized and non-controlled trials of exercise training interventions in solid-organ transplant candidates were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess procedural quality. Safety was defined as the number of reported adverse events during exercise training. Adherence was evaluated from session attendance, and efficacy as changes in cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), exercise capacity, muscular strength, health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and lung function. Eleven studies involving 874 patients were included: four randomized controlled, one non-randomized controlled and six non-controlled trials. Six studies included heart transplant candidates and five involved patients awaiting lung transplantation. Three trials included aerobic-only training, one incorporated resistance-only exercise and seven combined modalities. Twelve adverse events were reported with four due to exercise, although methods to collect these data were often omitted. Exercise adherence ranged from 82.5% to 100%, but was poorly described. No significant between-group changes attributable to exercise training were demonstrated. However, significant within-group improvements in CRF, exercise capacity, muscular strength, lung function and HR-QoL were observed. Patients awaiting heart or lung transplant appear to tolerate exercise training despite the larger number of adverse events compared to other high-risk populations. Exercise training demonstrated within-group benefits for several outcomes, with no significant between-group differences. Randomized controlled trials with sufficient statistical power are required for all solid-organ transplant candidates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 19%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 33 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 18%
Sports and Recreations 8 8%
Unspecified 4 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 37 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 December 2021.
All research outputs
#14,783,193
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Transplantation Reviews
#141
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,848
of 377,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transplantation Reviews
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 377,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.