Consensus on exercise reporting template (Cert): Modified delphi study

© 2016 American Physical Therapy Association. Background. Exercise interventions are often incompletely described in reports of clinical trials, hampering evaluation of results and replication and implementation into practice. Objective. The aim of this study was to develop a standardized method for reporting exercise programs in clinical trials: the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). Design and Methods. Using the EQUATOR Network’s methodological framework, 137 exercise experts were invited to participate in a Delphi consensus study. A list of 41 items was identified from a meta-epidemiologic study of 73 systematic reviews of exercise. For each item, participants indicated agreement on an 11-point rating scale. Consensus for item inclusion was defined a priori as greater than 70% agreement of respondents rating an item 7 or above. Three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires and a Delphi workshop were used. Results. There were 57 (response rate=42%), 54 (response rate=95%), and 49 (response rate=91%) respondents to rounds 1 through 3, respectively, from 11 countries and a range of disciplines. In round 1, 2 items were excluded; 24 items reached consensus for inclusion (8 items accepted in original format), and 16 items were revised in response to participant suggestions. Of 14 items in round 2, 3 were excluded, 11 reached consensus for inclusion (4 items accepted in original format), and 7 were reworded. Sixteen items were included in round 3, and all items reached greater than 70% consensus for inclusion. Limitations. The views of included Delphi panelists may differ from those of experts who declined participation and may not fully represent the views of all exercise experts. Conclusions. The CERT, a 16-item checklist developed by an international panel of exercise experts, is designed to improve the reporting of exercise programs in all evaluative study designs and contains 7 categories: materials, provider, delivery, location, dosage, tailoring, and compliance. The CERT will encourage transparency, improve trial interpretation and replication, and facilitate implementation of effective exercise interventions into practice

Supervised exercise therapy for intermittent claudication: Current status and future perspectives

Intermittent claudication (IC) has a high prevalence in the older population and is closely associated with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. High mortality rates are reported due to ongoing atherosclerotic disease. Because of these serious health risks, treatment of IC should address reduction of cardiovascular events (and related morbidity/mortality) and improvement of the poor health-related quality of life (QoL) and functional capacity. In several randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews, supervised exercise therapy (SET) is compared with non-supervised exercise, usual care, placebo, walking advice or vascular interventions. The current evidence supports SET as the primary treatment for IC. SET improves maximum walking distance and health-related QoL with a marginal risk of co-morbidity or mortality. This is also illustrated in contemporary international guidelines. Community-based SET appears to be at least as efficacious as programs provided in a clinical setting. In the Netherlands, a national integrated care network (ClaudicatioNet) providing specialized care for patients with IC is currently being implemented. Besides providing a standardized form of SET, the specialized physical therapists stimulate medication compliance and perform lifestyle coaching. Future research should focus on the influence of co-morbidities on prognosis and effect of SET outcome and the potential beneficial effects of SET combined with a vascular intervention

Supervised Exercise Therapy for Intermittent Claudication Is Increasingly Endorsed by Dutch Vascular Surgeons

Although supervised exercise therapy (SET) is generally accepted as an effective noninvasive treatment for intermittent claudication (IC), Dutch vascular surgeons were initially somewhat hesitant as reported by a 2011 questionnaire study. Later on, a nationwide multidisciplinary network for SET was introduced in the Netherlands. The aim of this questionnaire study was to determine possible trends in conceptions among Dutch vascular surgeons regarding the prescription of SET. In the year of 2015, Dutch vascular surgeons, fellows, and senior residents were asked to complete a 26-item questionnaire including issues that were considered relevant for prescribing SET such as patient selection criteria and comorbidity. Outcome was compared to the 2011 survey. Data of 124 respondents (82% males; mean age 46 years; 64% response rate) were analyzed. SET referral rate of new IC patients was not different over time (2015: 81% vs. 2011: 75%; P = 0.295). However, respondents were more willing to prescribe SET in IC patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2015: 86% vs. 2011: 69%; P = 0.002). Nevertheless, a smaller portion of respondents found that SET was also indicated for aortoiliac disease (2015: 63% vs. 2011: 76%; P = 0.049). Insufficient health insurance coverage and/or personal financial resources were the most important presumed barriers preventing patients from initiating SET (80% of respondents). Moreover, 94% of respondents judged that SET should be fully reimbursed by all Dutch basic health insurances. The concept of SET for IC is nowadays generally embraced by the vast majority of Dutch vascular surgeons. SET may have gained in popularity in IC patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidity. However, SET remains underutilized for aortoiliac disease. Reimbursement is considered crucial for a successful SET implementatio

Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) : A Modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND: Exercise interventions are often incompletely described in reports of clinical trials hampering evaluation of results and replication and implementation into practice. OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardized method for reporting exercise programs in clinical trials, the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). DESIGN AND METHODS: Using the EQUATOR Network's methodological framework we invited 137 exercise experts to participate in a Delphi consensus study. A list of 41 items was identified from a meta-epidemiologic study of 73 systematic reviews of exercise. For each item, participants indicated agreement on an 11-point rating scale. Consensus for item inclusion was defined a priori as greater than 70% agreement of respondents rating an item seven or above. We used three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires and a Delphi workshop. RESULTS: There were 57 (response rate 42%), 54 and 49 respondents to Rounds 1-3 respectively from 11 countries and a range of disciplines. In Round One, two items were excluded; 24 items reached consensus for inclusion (eight items in original format); and 16 items revised in response to participant suggestions. Of 14 items in Round Two, three were excluded; 11 reached consensus for inclusion (four items accepted in original format); and seven reworded. Sixteen items were included in Round Three and all items reached greater than 70% consensus for inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: The CERT, a 16-item checklist developed by an international panel of exercise experts, is designed to improve the reporting of exercise programs in all evaluative study designs and contains seven categories: materials, provider, delivery, location, dosage, tailoring, and compliance. The CERT will encourage transparency, improve trial interpretation and replication and facilitate implementation of effective exercise interventions into practice