Isometric exercise and inter-individual response differences on resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Isometric Exercise Training and Arterial Hypertension: An Updated Review

Hypertension is recognised as a leading attributable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and premature mortality. Global initiatives towards the prevention and treatment of arterial hypertension are centred around non-pharmacological lifestyle modification. Exercise recommendations differ between professional and scientific organisations, but are generally unanimous on the primary role of traditional aerobic and dynamic resistance exercise. In recent years, isometric exercise training (IET) has emerged as an effective novel exercise intervention with consistent evidence of reductions in blood pressure (BP) superior to that reported from traditional guideline-recommended exercise modes. Despite a wealth of emerging new data and endorsement by select governing bodies, IET remains underutilised and is not widely prescribed in clinical practice. This expert-informed review critically examines the role of IET as a potential adjuvant tool in the future clinical management of BP. We explore the efficacy, prescription protocols, evidence quality and certainty, acute cardiovascular stimulus, and physiological mechanisms underpinning its anti-hypertensive effects. We end the review with take-home suggestions regarding the direction of future IET research.

Resistance training and inter-interindividual response differences on cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults: An ancillary meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Examine true inter-individual response differences (IIRD) as a result of resistance training on cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults. Data from a recent meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials representing 552 men and women (292 resistance training, 260 control) ≥ 60 years of age were included. The primary outcome was cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max) in ml.kg-1.min-1. Using the inverse variance heterogeneity (IVhet) model, statistically significant treatment effect (resistance training minus control) increases in VO2max in ml.kg-1.min-1 were found (mean, 1.8, 95% CI, 0.4 to 3.3 ml.kg-1.min-1, p = 0.01; Q = 82.8, p < 0.001; I2 = 74.6%, 95% CI, 61.6 to 83.3%; τ 2 =1.1). The 95% prediction interval (PI) was -0.8 to 4.5 ml.kg-1.min-1. However, no statistically significant IIRD was observed (mean, 0.6, 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.4 ml.kg-1.min-1; τ 2 =1.5). The 95% PI was -1.8 to 2.0 ml.kg-1.min-1. In conclusion, while progressive resistance training may increase VO2max in ml.kg-1.min-1, a lack of true resistance-training-associated IIRD exist.

An evidence-based guide to the efficacy and safety of isometric resistance training in hypertension and clinical implications

More than 30 randomized controlled trials, supported by individual patient-level and group-level meta-analyses and a Delphi analysis of expert opinion, unequivocally show isometric resistance training (IRT) elicits antihypertensive benefits in healthy people and those with chronic illness. We aim to provide efficacy and safety evidence, and a guide for IRT prescription and delivery. Recommendations are made for the use of IRT in specific patient populations and appropriate methods for IRT delivery. Published data suggest IRT consistently elicits mean blood pressure reductions of 7.4/3.3 mmHg systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure, equivalent to antihypertensive medication monotherapy. Blood pressure reductions of this size are associated with an approximate 13% to 22% reduction in major cardiovascular events. Moreover, IRT is safe in a range of patient populations. We suggest that IRT has the greatest potential benefit when used as an antihypertensive therapy in individuals unwilling and/or unable to complete aerobic exercise, or who have had limited adherence or success with it; individuals with resistant or uncontrolled hypertension, already taking at least two pharmacological antihypertensive agents; and healthy or clinical populations, as an adjunct to aerobic exercise and dietary intervention in those who have not yet attained control of their hypertension. IRT is efficacious and produces clinically meaningful blood pressure reductions (systolic blood pressure, 7 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure, 3 mmHg). IRT is safe and typical program delivery requires only about 17 min weekly. IRT should be used as an adjunct to other exercise modalities, in people unable to complete other types of exercise, or in resistant hypertension.

[Impact of isometric training on blood pressure: an umbrella study of systematic reviews and meta-analyses]

High blood pressure causes 45% of deaths from heart diseases and 51% of deaths from stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct systematic search and summarize the systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses about impact of isometric training on blood pressure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematic search for publications in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos databases for the period from January of 2017 yr. to 19 of January 2023 yr. was carried out. The search was done by keywords: isometric exercises, isometric training, blood pressure, arterial hypertension, static resistance training, handgrip test. Methodological quality of included articles was assessed using the «Assessment of methodological quality of systematic reviews» (AMSTAR-2) tool. The number of systematic reviews equal 15 was analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall methodological quality of 15 included reviews, obtained by AMSTAR-2, revealed a very low confidence rate (critically low confidence, 10 publications) for results of systematic review and meta-analyses. In total, analysis and generalization of all results of included systematic reviews about blood pressure decrease by isometric training showed, that systolic blood pressure against the background of this method decreases on average by 6.1±2.0 mm Hg, and diastolic blood pressure - by 3.0±1.0 mm Hg.

CONCLUSION

Authors of 15 systemic reviews, included in an umbrella study, reached a common conclusion about isometric training efficacy in secondary prevention of arterial hypertension.

Walking and resting blood pressure: An inter-individual response difference meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

While walking is associated with reductions in resting SBP and DBP, a lack of true IIRD exists, suggesting that factors other than training response variation (random variation, physiological responses associated with behavioral changes that are not the result of walking) are responsible for the observed variation in resting SBP and DBP.

Safety, efficacy and delivery of isometric resistance training as an adjunct therapy for blood pressure control: a modified Delphi study

Uncontrolled hypertension remains the major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Isometric resistance training (IRT) has been shown to be a useful nonpharmacological therapy for reducing blood pressure (BP); however, some exercise physiologists and other health professionals are uncertain of the efficacy and safety of IRT. Experts' consensus was sought in light of the current variability of IRT use as an adjunct treatment for hypertension. An expert consensus-building analysis (Delphi study) was conducted on items relevant to the safety, efficacy and delivery of IRT. The study consisted of 3 phases: (1) identification of items and expert participants for inclusion; (2) a two-round modified Delphi exercise involving expert panelists to build consensus; and (3) a study team consensus meeting for a final item review. A list of 50 items was generated, and 42 international experts were invited to join the Delphi panel. Thirteen and 10 experts completed Delphi Rounds 1 and 2, respectively, reaching consensus on 26 items in Round 1 and 10 items in Round 2. The study team consensus meeting conducted a final item review and considered the remaining 14 items for the content list. A final list of 43 items regarding IRT reached expert consensus: 7/10 items on safety, 11/11 items on efficacy, 10/12 items on programming, 8/10 items on delivery, and 7/7 on the mechanism of action. This study highlights that while experts reached a consensus that IRT is efficacious as an antihypertensive therapy, some still have safety concerns, and there is also ongoing conjecture regarding optimal delivery.