This review summarizes the existing knowledge regarding the effects of physical exercise in patients suffering from multiple sclerosis (MS). Furthermore, recommendations are given regarding exercise prescription for MS patients and for future study directions. Previously, MS patients were advised not to participate in physical exercise. During recent years, it has been increasingly acknowledged that exercise benefits MS patients. The requirement for exercise in MS patients is emphasized by their physiological profile, which probably reflects both the effects of the disease per se and the reversible effects of an inactive lifestyle. To date the effects of exercise have only been studied in moderately impaired MS patients with an EDSS score of less than 7. Evidence exists for recommending participation in endurance training at low to moderate intensity, as the existing literature demonstrates that MS patients can both tolerate and benefit from this training modality. Also, resistance training of moderate intensity seems to be well tolerated and to have beneficial effects on MS patients, but the methodological quality of the existing evidence is in general low and the number of studies is limited. Only two studies have evaluated the effects of combined resistance- and endurance training, making solid conclusions regarding this training modality impossible.

No abstract

The present study provides level III evidence supporting the hypothesis that lower extremity progressive resistance training can improve muscle strength and functional capacity in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Recently, several studies have examined whether low-volume sprint interval training (SIT) may improve aerobic and metabolic function. The objective of this study was to systematically review the existing literature regarding the aerobic and metabolic effects of SIT in healthy sedentary or recreationally active adults. A systematic literature search was performed (Bibliotek.dk, SPORTDiscus, Embase, PEDro, SveMed+, and Pubmed). Meta-analytical procedures were applied evaluating effects on maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). Nineteen unique studies [four randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nine matched-controlled trials and six noncontrolled studies] were identified, evaluating SIT interventions lasting 2-8 weeks. Strong evidence support improvements of aerobic exercise performance and VO2max following SIT. A meta-analysis across 13 studies evaluating effects of SIT on VO2max showed a weighted mean effects size of g = 0.63 95% CI (0.39; 0.87) and VO2max increases of 4.2-13.4%. Solid evidence support peripheral adaptations known to increase the oxidative potential of the muscle following SIT, whereas evidence regarding central adaptations was limited and equivocal. Some evidence indicated changes in substrate oxidation at rest and during exercise as well as improved glycemic control and insulin sensitivity following SIT. In conclusion, strong evidence support improvement of aerobic exercise performance and VO2max following SIT, which coincides with peripheral muscular adaptations. Future RCTs on long-term SIT and underlying mechanisms are warranted.

Fatigue occurs in the majority of multiple sclerosis patients and therapeutic possibilities are few. Fatigue, mood and quality of life were studied in patients with multiple sclerosis following progressive resistance training leading to improvement of muscular strength and functional capacity. Fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale, FSS), mood (Major Depression Inventory, MDI) and quality of life (physical and mental component scores, PCS and MCS, of SF36) were scored at start, end and follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial of 12 weeks of progressive resistance training in moderately disabled (Expanded Disability Status Scale, EDSS: 3-5.5) multiple sclerosis patients including a Control group (n = 15) and an Exercise group (n = 16). Fatigue (FSS > 4) was present in all patients. Scores of FSS, MDI, PCS-SF36 and MCS-SF36 were comparable at start of study in the two groups. Fatigue improved during exercise by -0.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to 0.4) a.u. vs. 0.1 (95% CI -0.4 to 0.6) a.u. in controls (p = 0.04), mood improved by -2.4 (95% CI -4.1 to 0.7) a.u. vs. 1.1 (-1.2 to 3.4) a.u. in controls (p = 0.01) and quality of life (PCS-SF36) improved by 3.5 (95% CI 1.4-5.7) a.u. vs. -1.0 (95% CI -3.4-1.4) a.u. in controls (p = 0.01). The beneficial effect of progressive resistance training on all scores was maintained at follow-up after further 12 weeks. Fatigue, mood and quality of life all improved following progressive resistance training, the beneficial effect being maintained for at least 12 weeks after end of intervention.