Health benefits, safety and cost of physical activity interventions for mental health conditions: A meta-review to inform translation efforts

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Mental Health and Physical Activity

Publisher

Elsevier Ltd

School

Exercise Medicine Research Institute

RAS ID

31307

Funders

Funding information available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2018.11.001

Grant Number

NHMRC Number : 1123336

Comments

Czosnek, L., Lederman, O., Cormie, P., Zopf, E., Stubbs, B., & Rosenbaum, S. (2019). Health benefits, safety and cost of physical activity interventions for mental health conditions: A meta-review to inform translation efforts. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 16, 140-151. Available here

Abstract

Background

Mental illness is a leading cause of the global burden of disease. Physical activity (PA) can improve physical and mental health outcomes for people with mental illness, yet routine implementation of PA within standard care remains ad-hoc. The reasons for this are unclear, although the dissonance between the evidence produced in research settings and that needed in real-world environments may be key.

Purpose

To explore the effectiveness of PA interventions as a treatment for mental illness. We synthesised past systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of reviews from database inception to 09/2017. Reviews were included that considered any mental health condition (diagnosed via standardised criteria) and where PA interventions were a stand-alone or adjunctive treatment. Effectiveness was defined as outcomes that are important in real-world healthcare (i.e. expected clinical outcomes, intervention safety and cost).

Results

From 4008 hits, 33 reviews (including 155 unique studies) were included and 32 reported that PA has a positive effect on at least one main outcome of interest (symptoms of mental illness, quality of life and/or physical health). There was inconsistent reporting of adverse events and no cost data was identified. The AMSTAR quality rating suggests inconsistencies in review quality.

Conclusions

The research agenda must expand to report on outcomes that can support evidence translation efforts (i.e. cost and adverse events). Without such a shift, research in PA and mental health may fail to achieve translation to routine care and may have limited impact on patient outcomes.

DOI

10.1016/j.mhpa.2018.11.001

Access Rights

free_to_read

Link to Full Text

Share

 
COinS