Fig 1.
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources.
*Consider, if feasible to do so, reporting the number of records identified from each database or register searched (rather than the total number across all databases/registers). **If automation tools were used, indicate how many records were excluded by a human and how many were excluded by automation tools. From: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/.
Table 1.
Characteristics of the studies’ participants and interventions.
Fig 2.
(A) Outcomes on physical activity. (B) Outcomes on pain. Green, Low risk of bias; Yellow, Some concerns; Red, High risk of bias.
Fig 3.
The mean difference and 95% CI values in physical activities.
Results from each study. Interv., intervention; Std Mean Difference, standardized mean difference; IV, inverse variance; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; PASE, Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly; SQUASH, short questionnaire to assess health-enhancing physical activity; LTPA, average monthly leisure time physical activity; MVPA, moderate to vigorous physical activity; METs, metabolic equivalents; LEE, Lower-extremity exercise; Accel, accelerometer.
Table 2.
Evidence for outcome measures.
SMD, standardized mean difference; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.
Fig 4.
The mean difference and 95% CI values in pain.
Results from each study. Interv., intervention; Std Mean Difference, standardized mean difference; IV, inverse variance; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; VAS, visual analogue scale; HOOS, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale; KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale; NRS, numerical rating scale; BPI, brief pain inventory.