There were no statistically significant differences in attrition rates between the interventions .
In general , adverse effects were poorly recorded , but no serious adverse effects were reported .
The evidence ( rated as low quality ) suggested that moderate- and moderate- to high-intensity resistance training improves multidimensional function , pain , tenderness , and muscle strength in women with fibromyalgia .
The evidence ( rated as low quality ) also suggested that eight weeks of aerobic exercise was superior to moderate-intensity resistance training for improving pain in women with fibromyalgia .
There was low- quality evidence that 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training was superior to flexibility exercise training in women with fibromyalgia for improvements in pain and multidimensional function .
There was low- quality evidence that women with fibromyalgia can safely perform moderate- to high-resistance training
BACKGROUND Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain that leads to reduced physical function .
Exercise training is commonly recommended as a treatment for management of symptoms .
We examined the literature on resistance training for individuals with fibromyalgia .
Resistance training is exercise performed against a progressive resistance with the intention of improving muscle strength , muscle endurance , muscle power , or a combination of these .
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of resistance exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia .
We compared resistance training versus control and versus other types of exercise training .
Patient utilities in fibromyalgia and the association with other outcome measures.
OBJECTIVE To compare in patients with fibromyalgia ( FM ) utilities derived by rating scale and st and ard gamble methods ; to gain insight into construct validity by relating utility values to other outcome measures ; to assess the sensitivity to change of utilities . METHODS A total of 73 patients with FM were r and omized into one of 3 groups : low impact fitness training , biofeedback , or controls . At baseline and after 6 mo the Maastricht Utility Measurement Question naire was applied . By means of both the rating scale and st and ard gamble method patients were asked to value their own health status . Construct validity of patient utility measurements was evaluated by Spearman correlation and multiple regression of baseline values with pain , stiffness , patient 's global assessment , Sickness Impact Profile ( SIP ) , modified Health Assessment Question naire and Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale ( AIMS ) . Sensitivity to change was assessed against changes in these outcomes . RESULTS Rating scale utilities correlated significantly ( p < 0.05 ) with patient 's global assessment ( rs = 0.53 ) , pain ( rs = -0.47 ) , SIP ( rs = -0.43 ) , and with 9 of 11 dimensions of the AIMS ( rs ranging from 0.23 to 0.62 ) . St and ard gamble utilities correlated significantly with mobility , pain , and arthritis impact of the AIMS scale ( rs from 0.22 to 0.36 ) and with pain by visual analog scale ( rs = -0.24 ) and patient 's global assessment ( rs = 0.32 ) . Multiple regression analysis showed that patient 's global assessment explained 41 % ( rating scale ) and 10 % ( st and ard gamble ) of total variance in baseline utilities . Also , 16 % of the variance in change in rating scale utility values was explained by changes in patient 's global assessment . In contrast , variance of changes in st and ard gamble utility values was not explained significantly by changes in other disease outcomes . CONCLUSION Rating scale utilities correlated more strongly with disease outcome measures than st and ard gamble utilities . Also , construct validity for the rating scale was better than for the st and ard gamble . In FM , utility measurement is sensitive to the method chosen to elicit patient priorities
There were no statistically significant differences in attrition rates between the interventions .
In general , adverse effects were poorly recorded , but no serious adverse effects were reported .
The evidence ( rated as low quality ) suggested that moderate- and moderate- to high-intensity resistance training improves multidimensional function , pain , tenderness , and muscle strength in women with fibromyalgia .
The evidence ( rated as low quality ) also suggested that eight weeks of aerobic exercise was superior to moderate-intensity resistance training for improving pain in women with fibromyalgia .
There was low- quality evidence that 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training was superior to flexibility exercise training in women with fibromyalgia for improvements in pain and multidimensional function .
There was low- quality evidence that women with fibromyalgia can safely perform moderate- to high-resistance training
BACKGROUND Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain that leads to reduced physical function .
Exercise training is commonly recommended as a treatment for management of symptoms .
We examined the literature on resistance training for individuals with fibromyalgia .
Resistance training is exercise performed against a progressive resistance with the intention of improving muscle strength , muscle endurance , muscle power , or a combination of these .
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of resistance exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia .
We compared resistance training versus control and versus other types of exercise training .