4.4 Article

Combined exercise improves gastrointestinal motility in psychiatric in patients

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CASES
卷 6, 期 8, 页码 207-213

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v6.i8.207

关键词

Combined exercise; Constipation; Colonic transit time; Radio-opaque marker; Psychiatry unit patient

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM To examine the effect of combined exercise on colonic transit time (CTT) in admitted psychiatric patients. METHODS Over a 6-mo period, consecutive in patients with mental illness were recruited from the Somang Hospital Psychiatry Unit. A combined exercise program that included 60 min per day of exercise 3 d per week for 12 wk was performed. Physical fitness and CTT of the patients were measured twice before and twice after the exercise program. CTT was measured using a multiple marker technique with a radio-opaque marker. Changes in the exercising patients' CTT and weight-, cardiovascular- and fitness-related parameters were statistically assessed. RESULTS After the 12-wk combined exercise intervention, decreased intestinal transit time was observed in all CTTs of the exercise group, including the right CTT (exercise: 15.6 +/- 15.2 vs 9.2 +/- 11.9, control: 13.1 +/- 10.4 vs 10.9 +/- 18.7), left CTT (exercise: 19.7 +/- 23.5 vs 10.4 +/- 13.2, control: 19.2 +/- 19.0 vs 16.9 +/- 19.8), recto-sigmoid CTT (exercise: 14.3 +/- 16.7 vs 6.7 +/- 7.9, control: 15.0 +/- 14.4 vs 19.3 +/- 30.3), and total colonic transit time (TCTT) (exercise: 50.2 +/- 38.1 vs 27.1 +/- 28.0, control: 47.4 +/- 34.6 vs 47.3 +/- 47.3). After the 12-wk combined exercise period, TCTT was significantly shortened in the exercise group compared with that in the control group. In addition to eating habits, water intake, and fiber intake, the increased physical activity level as a result of the 12-wk combined exercise program reduced the CTT. CONCLUSION The CTT of the psychiatric patients was reduced due to increased physical activity via a 12-wk combined exercise program.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据