Yamani, Naser

ABSTRACT Background Randomized controlled trials have highlighted the importance of exercise training on the severity of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to analyze the data from these studies on the severity of OSA indices as measured by formal polysomnography. The secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of exercise on oxygen desaturation index, body mass index and several metabolic parameters associated with OSA. Methods Two independent reviewers and an experienced librarian searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and Scopus and SPORTDiscus databases from January 1, 2000, to October 21, 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the impact of exercise training on OSA severity. Pre-exercise and postexercise training data on the primary and secondary objectives were extracted. Results A total of 11 randomized controlled trials (533 study participants) were identified based on the inclusion criteria. The mean pre-exercise and postexercise reduction in apnea hypopnea index was −6.94 event per hour (95% confidence interval [CI]: −10.74 to −3.13, I2 = 84%). The mean changes in oxygen desaturation index and body mass index were −5.32 events per hour (95% CI: −9.65 to −0.99, I2 = 73%) and −1.21 kg·m−2 (95% CI: −1.80 to −0.62, I2 = 49%) respectively. Conclusion In adult patients with OSA, exercise training was associated with statistically significant reduction in OSA severity.

Background: Efficacy of an intervention is commonly evaluated using P values, in addition to effect size measures such as absolute risk reduction, relative risk reduction, and numbers needed to treat. However, these measures are not always intuitive to clinicians. The fragility index (FI) is a more intuitive number that can facilitate interpretation but can only be used with binary outcomes. FI is the minimum number of patients who must be moved from the nonevent group to the event group to turn a significant result nonsignificant. In this retrospective analysis, we assessed the robustness of cardiovascular randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which report a positive (statistically significant) primary outcome by using the FI. Methods and Results: We searched Medline from 2007 to 2017 to identify cardiovascular RCTs published in 6 high impact journals ( The Lancet , New England Journal of Medicine , Journal of the American Medical Association , Circulation , Journal of the American College of Cardiology and European Heart Journal ). Only RCTs with sample sizes >500 and a 2-by-2 factorial design or dichotomous primary outcomes were selected. FI was calculated using a defined approach. Among the cohort of 123 RCTs that met inclusion criteria, median FI was 13 (interquartile range, 5–26). In 28 trials (22.8%), FI ranged between 1 and 4. In 37 trials (30.1%), number of patients lost to follow-up was higher than the FI. Pharmaceutical interventions had higher FI compared with other interventions, FI=19 (7–52; P =0.002). Median FI varied according to subspecialty (electrophysiology=2; heart failure=11; interventional cardiology=8; P =0.020) and multiregional RCTs had higher FI=22 (12–53.25; P =0.023). FI did not differ based on risk of bias indicators, funding, or publication year. Conclusions: Considerable variations in FI were observed among cardiovascular trials, suggesting the need for careful interpretation of results, particularly when number of patients lost to follow-up exceeds FI.