Why the study?
Although participants drop out of exergame interventions for blood pressure management, no evidence synthesis has evaluated dropout rates and associated characteristics.
Do exergame-based interventions affect dropout rates compared to control groups in adults managing blood pressure?
Do exergame-based interventions affect dropout rates compared to control groups in adults managing blood pressure?
This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate dropout rates and associated factors in trials using exergames for blood pressure management.
Protocol for exergame dropout meta-analysis in hypertension trials is hypothesis-generating; results may guide adherence strategies but should not yet change practice.
Exergame, a type of enjoyable active video game that combines physical exertion and game is a technological innovation that has generated important information for the health field. In the cardiovascular area, exergames have been used to manage blood pressure in adults with some positive results. Despite this, in primary studies, it is possible to identify that participants dropout of the exergames interventions, but no synthesis of evidence has been produced so far to explore that. The aims of this review are i) to estimate the pooled rate of dropouts in controlled trials assessing the effects of exergame-based interventions on resting blood pressure in adults and older people; ii) to compare dropout rates between exergame and controls groups, and iii) to investigate the intervention characteristics associate with dropout rates. Inclusion criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs (≥ 4 weeks) assessing the effects of exergame-based interventions on resting blood pressure in adults aged ≥ 18 years old. Without restriction to language, date of the publication, and intervention setting. Literature searches will be conducted using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scientific Electronic Library Online. The quality of the RCTs will be assessed using Cochrane’s risk of bias tool. A descriptive narrative synthesis and a random-effects model meta-analysis of the pooled event rate (prevalence) will be provided (p < 0.05). This protocol is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020199547.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lourenço et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: