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 .
High or low intensity aerobic fitness training in fibromyalgia: does it matter?
OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy of training in fibromyalgia ( FM ) , we compared the effects of high intensity fitness training ( HIF ) and low intensity fitness training ( LIF ) . METHODS Thirty-seven female patients with FM were r and omly allocated to either a HIF group ( n = 19 ) or a LIF group ( n = 18 ) . Four patients ( 1 HIF group , 3 LIF group ) refused to participate after r and omization but before the start of the intervention . They were excluded from the analysis . Assessment s were performed at baseline and after 20 weeks of HIF or LIF . The primary outcome was patient 's global assessment [ on 100 mm visual analog scale ( VAS ) ] . Secondary endpoints were pain , number of tender points , total myalgic score , physical fitness , health status , and psychological distress . RESULTS One patient in the HIF group ( n = 18 ) and 2 in the LIF group ( n = 15 ) stopped training sessions during the course of the study . Nine of 18 patients in the HIF group compared to 8 of 15 patients in the LIF group achieved a participation rate of 67 % or more . Most important reasons for nonadherence were postexercise pain and fatigue , time consumption , and stress . The VAS for global well being improved slightly from 64 to 56 mm in the HIF group , and did not change in the LIF group ( 58 to 61 mm ) ( p = 0.07 ) . The Wmax ( physical fitness ) changed modestly from 110 to 123 watt in the HIF group , and from 97 to 103 watt in the LIF group ( p = 0.3 ) . VAS for pain increased from 53 to 64 mm in the HIF group and from 52 to 54 mm in the LIF group . The large st and ard deviations around mean change in global assessment s , number of tender points , total myalgic score , and psychological distress ( by SCL-90 ) severely influenced the power to detect within- and between-group differences . Analysis limited to those patients who accomplished a high attendance rate ( > 67 % ) showed similar results . CONCLUSION High intensity physical fitness training compared to low intensity physical fitness training leads to only modest improvements in physical fitness and general well being in patients with FM , and does not positively affect psychological status and general health
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 .