Roger Hilfiker|André Meichtry|Manuela Eicher|Lina Nilsson Balfe|Ruud H. Knols|Martin L. Verra|Jan Taeymans
Exercise and other non-pharmaceutical interventions for cancer-related fatigue in patients during or after cancer treatment: a systematic review incorporating an indirect-comparisons meta-analysis
HES-SO Valais-Wallis|ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences|Physiotherapy New Zealand|University of Lausanne|University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland|HES-SO Valais-Wallis|University Hospital of Zurich|University Hospital of Bern|Vrije Universiteit Brussel|Bern University of Applied Sciences|Center for Health, Exercise and Sport Sciences
assess relative effects different types exercise nonpharmaceutical interventions cancerrelated fatigue crf patients cancer treatmentsystematic review indirectcomparisons metaanalysisarticles searched pubmed cochrane central published metaanalysesrandomised studies published january 2017 evaluating different types exercise nonpharmaceutical interventions reduce crf cancer type treatmentrisk bias assessment pedro criteria random effects bayesian network metaanalysiswe included 245 studies comparing treatments usual care cancer treatment relaxation exercise highest ranked intervention standardisedmean difference smd 077 95 credible interval cri 122 031 massage 078 155 001 cognitivebehavioural therapy combined physical activity combined cbt 072 134 009 combined aerobic resistance training 067 101 034 resistance training 053 102 003 aerobic 053 080 026 yoga 051 101 000 moderatetolarge smds cancer treatment yoga showed highest effect 068 093 043 combined aerobic resistance training 050 066 034 combined cbt 045 070 021 taichi 045 084 006 cbt 042 058 025 resistance training 035 062 008 aerobic 033 051 016 showed smalltomoderate smdspatients choose among different effective types exercise nonpharmaceutical interventions reduce crf