PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Conventional exercises (CEs) can provide health benefits for older adults, but the long-term exercise adherence rate is low. As an emerging, stimulating, and self-motivating strategy, exergames (EGs) are defined as combinations of exercises and games that users carry out through physical actions. They can promote exercise, but the health effects of EGs versus CEs on the physical function and mental health (cognitive function, depression, and quality of life) of older adults remain controversial.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to compare the health benefits of EGs versus those of CEs for the physical function and mental health of older adults.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted from the earliest available date to February 2023 in the following 6 databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. All English-language randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of EGs versus those of CEs on the physical function and mental health of older adults, with nearly same physical activity between the 2 interventions, were included. Risk of bias was independently evaluated by 2 authors using the Cochrane risk of bias in randomized trials tool. Two authors independently extracted data. We followed the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions to process and analyze the data for meta-analysis. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs were used for continuous data, and random models were used for analyses.
RESULTS: We included 12 studies consisting of 919 participants in total. Of these, 10 studies were eventually included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that EGs versus CEs exhibited no significant differences in physical (P=.13; τ2=0.31; χ26=26.6; I2=77%; SMD=0.37; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.86) or cognitive function (P=.63; τ2=0.01; χ23=3.1; I2=4%; SMD=0.09; 95% CI -0.27 to 0.44) effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no significant difference between EGs and CEs in improving the physical function and cognitive function of older adults. Future studies are required to compare the effects of EGs versus those of CEs on cognitive function according to cognitive status, quantify the \"dose-effect\" relationship between EGs and health benefits, and evaluate the effects of different types and devices of EGs with regard to the health benefits of older adults.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42022322734; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=322734.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to compare the health benefits of EGs versus those of CEs for the physical function and mental health of older adults.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted from the earliest available date to February 2023 in the following 6 databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. All English-language randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of EGs versus those of CEs on the physical function and mental health of older adults, with nearly same physical activity between the 2 interventions, were included. Risk of bias was independently evaluated by 2 authors using the Cochrane risk of bias in randomized trials tool. Two authors independently extracted data. We followed the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions to process and analyze the data for meta-analysis. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs were used for continuous data, and random models were used for analyses.
RESULTS: We included 12 studies consisting of 919 participants in total. Of these, 10 studies were eventually included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that EGs versus CEs exhibited no significant differences in physical (P=.13; τ2=0.31; χ26=26.6; I2=77%; SMD=0.37; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.86) or cognitive function (P=.63; τ2=0.01; χ23=3.1; I2=4%; SMD=0.09; 95% CI -0.27 to 0.44) effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no significant difference between EGs and CEs in improving the physical function and cognitive function of older adults. Future studies are required to compare the effects of EGs versus those of CEs on cognitive function according to cognitive status, quantify the \"dose-effect\" relationship between EGs and health benefits, and evaluate the effects of different types and devices of EGs with regard to the health benefits of older adults.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42022322734; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=322734.
摘要：
背景：常规运动（CE）可以为老年人提供健康益处，但长期运动依从性较低。作为一个新兴的,刺激,和自我激励策略，运动游戏（EGs）被定义为用户通过身体动作进行的练习和游戏的组合。他们可以促进锻炼，但是EGs与CEs对身体功能和心理健康的健康影响(认知功能，抑郁症,和生活质量）的老年人仍然存在争议。
目的：本研究的目的是比较EGs与CEs对老年人身体功能和心理健康的健康益处。
方法：从最早的可用日期到2023年2月，在以下6个数据库中进行了全面搜索：PubMed，WebofScience,Embase,科克伦,CINAHL,和PsycINFO。所有英语随机对照试验比较EGs与CEs对老年人身体功能和心理健康的影响，两种干预措施之间几乎相同的身体活动，包括在内。2位作者使用随机试验工具中的Cochrane偏倚风险独立评估偏倚风险。两位作者独立提取数据。我们遵循Cochrane干预措施系统评价手册来处理和分析数据以进行荟萃分析。标准化平均差(SMD)和95%CI用于连续数据，和随机模型用于分析。
结果：我们纳入了12项研究，共919名参与者。其中,10项研究最终纳入荟萃分析。结果显示，EGs与CEs在身体（P=.13；τ2=0.31；χ26=26.6；I2=77％；SMD=0.37；95％CI-0.11至0.86）或认知功能（P=.63；τ2=0.01；χ23=3.1；I2=4％；SMD=0.09；95％CI-0.27至0.44）没有显着差异。
结论：我们的发现表明EGs和CEs在改善老年人的身体功能和认知功能方面没有显着差异。未来的研究需要根据认知状态比较EGs与CEs对认知功能的影响，量化EGs与健康益处之间的“剂量效应”关系，并评估不同类型和设备的EGs对老年人健康益处的影响。
背景：PROSPEROCRD42022322734;https://www.crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?RecordID=322734。
目的：本研究的目的是比较EGs与CEs对老年人身体功能和心理健康的健康益处。
方法：从最早的可用日期到2023年2月，在以下6个数据库中进行了全面搜索：PubMed，WebofScience,Embase,科克伦,CINAHL,和PsycINFO。所有英语随机对照试验比较EGs与CEs对老年人身体功能和心理健康的影响，两种干预措施之间几乎相同的身体活动，包括在内。2位作者使用随机试验工具中的Cochrane偏倚风险独立评估偏倚风险。两位作者独立提取数据。我们遵循Cochrane干预措施系统评价手册来处理和分析数据以进行荟萃分析。标准化平均差(SMD)和95%CI用于连续数据，和随机模型用于分析。
结果：我们纳入了12项研究，共919名参与者。其中,10项研究最终纳入荟萃分析。结果显示，EGs与CEs在身体（P=.13；τ2=0.31；χ26=26.6；I2=77％；SMD=0.37；95％CI-0.11至0.86）或认知功能（P=.63；τ2=0.01；χ23=3.1；I2=4％；SMD=0.09；95％CI-0.27至0.44）没有显着差异。
结论：我们的发现表明EGs和CEs在改善老年人的身体功能和认知功能方面没有显着差异。未来的研究需要根据认知状态比较EGs与CEs对认知功能的影响，量化EGs与健康益处之间的“剂量效应”关系，并评估不同类型和设备的EGs对老年人健康益处的影响。
背景：PROSPEROCRD42022322734;https://www.crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?RecordID=322734。
