Hypertension is the most common, costly, and preventable cardiovascular disease risk factor. Numerous professional organizations and committees recommend exercise as initial lifestyle therapy to prevent, treat, and control hypertension. Yet, these recommendations differ in the components of the Frequency, Intensity, Time, and Type (FITT) principle of exercise prescription (Ex Rx); the evidence upon which they are based is only of fair methodological quality; and the individual studies upon which they are based generally do not include people with hypertension, which are some of the limitations in this literature. The purposes of this review are to (1) overview the professional exercise recommendations for hypertension in terms of the FITT principle of Ex Rx; (2) discuss new and emerging research related to Ex Rx for hypertension; and (3) present an updated FITT Ex Rx for adults with hypertension that integrates the existing recommendations with this new and emerging research.

BackgroundAerobic exercise (AE) is recommended as first‐line antihypertensive lifestyle therapy based on strong evidence showing that it lowers blood pressure (BP) 5 to 7 mm Hg among adults with hypertension. Because of weaker evidence showing that dynamic resistance training (RT) reduces BP 2 to 3 mm Hg among adults with hypertension, it is recommended as adjuvant lifestyle therapy to AE training. Yet, existing evidence suggests that dynamic RT can lower BP as much or more than AE.Methods and ResultsWe meta‐analyzed 64 controlled studies (71 interventions) to determine the efficacy of dynamic RT as stand‐alone antihypertensive therapy. Participants (N=2344) were white (57%), middle‐aged (47.2±19.0 years), and overweight (26.8±3.4 kg/m2) adults with prehypertension (126.7±10.3/76.8±8.7 mm Hg); 15% were on antihypertensive medication. Overall, moderate‐intensity dynamic RT was performed 2.8±0.6 days/week for 14.4±7.9 weeks and elicited small‐to‐moderate reductions in systolic BP (SBP; d+=−0.31; 95% CIs, −0.43, −0.19; −3.0 mm Hg) and diastolic BP (DBP; d+=−0.30; 95% CIs, −0.38, −0.18; −2.1 mm Hg) compared to controls (Ps<0.001). Greater BP reductions occurred among samples with higher resting SBP/DBP: ≈6/5 mm Hg for hypertension, ≈3/3 mm Hg for prehypertension, and ≈0/1 mm Hg for normal BP (Ps<0.023). Furthermore, nonwhite samples with hypertension experienced BP reductions that were approximately twice the magnitude of those previously reported following AE training (−14.3 mm Hg [95% CIs, −19.0, −9.4]/−10.3 mm Hg [95% CIs, −14.5, −6.2]).ConclusionsOur results indicate that for nonwhite adult samples with hypertension, dynamic RT may elicit BP reductions that are comparable to or greater than those reportedly achieved with AE training. Dynamic RT should be further investigated as a viable stand‐alone therapeutic exercise option for adult populations with high BP.

The Eighth Joint National Committee guideline on the management of adult hypertension was recently released. Rather than recommending specific lifestyle modifications as in the Seventh Joint National Committee guideline, the Eighth Joint National Committee endorsed the recommendations of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology 2013 Lifestyle Work Group. The Lifestyle Work Group report included systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials from 2001 through 2011 of "fair to good" quality. In total, 11 reviews qualified for inclusion in the report, 6 of which included blood pressure (BP) as the primary outcome. Three reviews did not find significant reductions in BP, and BP status was not reported in 5. When BP was reported, only 22% of the patients had hypertension. Yet, the group concluded with a strength of evidence categorized as "high" that aerobic exercise training reduces BP by 1 to 5 mm Hg in individuals with hypertension and that the most effective exercise interventions on average included aerobic physical activity of moderate to vigorous intensity for at least 12 weeks, 3 to 4 sessions per week lasting 40 minutes per session. The exercise prescription recommendations of the Lifestyle Work Group deviate from those of other professional organizations and committees including the Seventh Joint National Committee, another American Heart Association scientific statement, the American College of Sports Medicine, the European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology, and the Canadian Health Education Program. The purposes of this review are to present the existing exercise recommendations for hypertension, discuss reasons for differences in these recommendations, discuss gaps in the literature, and address critical future research needs regarding exercise prescription for hypertension.

OBJECTIVES:To examine the effects of exercise training on cognitive function in individuals at risk of or diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD). DESIGN: Meta-analysis. SETTING: PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ProQuest were searched from inception until August 1, 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen studies with 23 interventions including 1,145 subjects with a mean age of 77.0 AE 7.5 were included. Most subjects were at risk of AD because they had mild cognitive impairment (64%) or a parent diagnosed with AD (1%), and 35% presented with AD. INTERVENTION: Controlled studies that included an exercise-only intervention and a nondiet, nonexercise control group and reported pre-and post-intervention cognitive function measurements. MEASUREMENTS: Cognitive function before and after the intervention and features of the exercise intervention. RESULTS: Exercise interventions were performed 3.4 AE 1.4 days per week at moderate intensity (3.7 AE 0.6 metabolic equivalents) for 45.2 AE 17.0 minutes per session for 18.6 AE 10.0 weeks and consisted primarily of aerobic exercise (65%). Overall, there was a modest favorable effect of exercise on cognitive function (d + = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.26-0.68). Within-group analyses revealed that exercise improved cognitive function (d +w = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.28), whereas cognitive function declined in the control group (d +w = À0.18, 95% CI = À0.36 to 0.00). Aerobic exercise had a moderate favorable effect on cognitive function (d +w = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.35-0.95), but other exercise types did not (d +w = 0.19, 95% CI = À0.06-0.43).CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that exercise training may delay the decline in cognitive function that occurs in individuals who are at risk of or have AD, with aerobic exercise possibly having the most favorable effect. Additional randomized controlled clinical trials that include objective measurements of cognitive function are needed to confirm our findings. J Am Geriatr Soc 0:1-9, 2018.

No abstract

In large literatures exhibiting heterogeneous effects, meta-analyses can incorporate methodological quality and generate conclusions that enable greater confidence not only about the substantive phenomenon but also about the role that methodological quality itself plays.

Numerous meta-analyses have been conducted to summarize the growing numbers of trials addressing the effects of exercise on blood pressure (BP), yet it is unclear how well they have satisfied contemporary methodological standards. We applied an augmented version of the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTARExBP) scale to 33 meta-analyses retrieved from searches of electronic databases. Qualifying reports used meta-analytic procedures; examined controlled exercise training trials; had BP as a primary outcome; and had exercise or physical activity interventions independently or combined with other lifestyle interventions. AMSTARExBP scores averaged near the middle of the scale (Mean = 56.0% ± 21.4% of total items possible); co-authored and more recent meta-analyses had higher quality scores. Common deficits were failures to disclose full search details (30% did), gauge the quality of included trials (48% did), use duplicate study selection and data extraction (55% did), or incorporate study quality in formulating results (35% did). Nearly all (91%) meta-analyses observed that exercise significantly lowered BP; fewer (58%) found that such effects depended on exercise or patient characteristics but these patterns often conflicted. Meta-analyses are often pillars of clinical recommendations and guidelines, yet only 58% addressed the clinical translations of their findings. In sum, meta-analyses have contributed less than ideally to our understanding of how exercise may impact BP, or how these BP effects may be moderated by patient or exercise characteristics. Future meta-analyses that better satisfy contemporary standards offer considerable promise to understand how and for whom exercise impacts BP.

Among samples with hypertension in trials of higher study quality, CET rivals aerobic exercise training as antihypertensive therapy. Because of the moderate quality of this literature, additional randomized controlled CET trials that examine BP as a primary outcome among samples with hypertension are warranted to confirm our promising findings.