1. The effects of physical training on asthma in adults
Candidate: Eirik Bakken
BEV2900 Bacheloroppgave, Vår 2014
Institutt for Nevromedisin, NTNU
Number of words: 4145 (table not included)

2. Abstract
There have been few studies on the effects of physical activity on asthma in adults, and much
empirical evidence has been inconsistent. This review gathers the data on the effects of regular
exercise on physical fitness, pulmonary function, asthma control and severity and quality of life of
adults with asthma. A web search of relevant data was done from 1990 to the present. 19 studies had
relevant title, study subject and right age group, while only 6 had the required training intervention.
Among the measures used, maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max) and forced expiratory volume in 1s
(FEV) were most frequently used among the studies. They all reported that regular exercise
significantly improved VO2max, but the results from lung function were inconclusive. Some
individual studies reported an improvement in asthma control, severity and quality of life, but in
general there is insufficient evidence to conclude on the effects of exercise on asthma control,
severity and quality of life.
Key words: asthma, physical exercise, adults, pulmonary function, physical fitness

3. Introduction
Bronchial asthma is defined as a clinical syndrome characterized by reversible obstruction to
airflow and increased bronchial responsiveness to a variety of stimuli including allergens and
environmental agents (Clark, 1992, 293). The common symptoms are wheezing, coughing, chest
tightness, and shortness of breath. It has a high prevalence in the world: E.g. more than 2 million
asthmatics in Australia alone (Morton, 2011, 312). And with no known cure, only the symptoms
caused by the pulmonary disease can be treated (Dogra, 2011, 318).
Asthma symptoms can be triggered by several factors, e.g. allergens (house-dust, mites, pets, fungi,
specific foods or pollens), cold air, infections, pollutants, and some drugs (Morton, 2011, 313). The
severity of asthma varies, from Olympic athletes with mild symptoms, to severe cases in individuals
whose daily activities are problematic and who often have to be admitted to hospitals.
Physical activity has also been reported to be associated with asthma. Asthmatic subjects may in
many ways benefit greatly by exercising regularly, since physical activity and training may increase
muscular strength, improve cardiovascular performance and reduce obesity (Pelkonen, 2003, 494).
Many patients have reported fewer symptoms when fit, but this has not been systematically
investigated (Ram, 2000, 162).
On the other hand, physical activity may trigger increasing airways resistance and result in exercise-
induced asthma and/or exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (Ram, 2005, 2). Many asthmatics
avoid physical training, since many of the symptoms after strenuous exercise such as shortness of
breath and coughing are similar to symptoms of asthma. This may explain why in some cases adults
and children with asthma are less fit than their peers (Emtner, 1996, 323).
Although asthma has a very high prevalence, there have been few studies that focus on the effects
that physical activity has on asthma, even fewer on adults, and the results have been inconclusive or
varied. The purpose of this review is to gather information from relevant original studies on
possible effects of physical activity / physical training in adults with asthma and see if
activity/training has a beneficial or detrimental effect on physical fitness, lung function, asthma
symptoms, severity, and quality of life.

4. Method
Studies were found and extracted by performing a systematic literature search from electronic
databases and by searching references lists of articles of previous reviews. Databases used were:
Google Scholar, Pubmed, Web of Science and Sportdiscus. The studies dated from 1990 to the
present day, mainly because earlier studies may contain outdated data and information on the
subject. Also, studies published earlier are not necessarily relevant, considering that asthma was not
recognized as an inflammatory disease, which influenced the diagnostic and treatment practices
(Heikkinen, 2012, 398). All studies reported here were in English, and preferably cited and/or used
in later works. The preferable type of study was randomly controlled trials (RCTs), since they with
their strong, sturdy design are considered qualitatively best (Heikkinen, 2012, 399). The main
search words were “training intervention” and “asthma”. All primary sources were original studies,
while other reviews and articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria served as secondary
supportive material.
Furthermore, studies that focused on the development of respiratory diseases, primarily exercise-
induced asthma (EIA) and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) by physical activity were
included as secondary sources to see if exercise has a detrimental or beneficial effect on asthma.
However, the studies did not contain information about training intervention or exercise level other
than that the subjects were Olympic athletes.
The studies were restricted to human trials, and included an adult population, ranging from 16 years
and older, male and female. For subjects to be included in the study, they would have to be
diagnosed for asthma by a physician, and being dependent on some form of regular medication for
alleviating symptoms. This review includes as many original studies as possible to obtain sufficient
and reliable data.
The study intervention was physical activity for the whole body at medium or higher intensity,
lasting at least 20 min, twice a week or more, for a period of at least of 4 weeks. All the studies
implied training at relatively the same intensity, 70 % of VO2max (Hallstrand, 2000), 75-85 % of
max heart rate (Cochrane, 1990), except for the study conducted by Emtner (1996), were the
subjects exercised at high intensity (80-90 % max heart rate), to see if asthmatics were able to
exercise at high intensity safely (Emtner, 1996).

5. The results from the studies that were of main interest, were physical fitness, pulmonary function,
asthma control (severity of symptoms, hospital visits, symptom-free days), quality of life and
possible follow-up after the intervention.
After the initial literature search, 19 studies had relevant title, study subject and right age group. All
but 6 studies were excluded, since they either did not have a training intervention or an insufficient
one. All the 6 studies were interventional studies with physical training (Cochrane, 1990) (Dogra,
2011) (Emtner, 1996) (Hallstrand, 2000) (Mendes, 2011) (Sonna, 2001). However, the control
groups were heterogeneous. The diagnosis for asthma was not uniform, either relying on a diagnosis
from a physician's diagnosis and some form of regular use of asthma medication or no diagnosis at
all. Neither was the severity of asthma uniform. Only one study conducted by Dogra and colleagues
did a follow up to study any long term effects (Dogra, 2011). The subjects were asked to do a three
months long self- administered training intervention after the original intervention was completed.
Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the reviewed studies.

6. Results
Training and physical fitness
In assessing physical fitness, VO2 max was the most commonly used measurement value. Cochrane
(1990) found a highly significant mean (standard deviation= SD) increase in VO2max (before: 23
(4.7) after: 28.4 (6)) in the training asthma group, which measured a significant increase in
percentage VO2max from 62 (10) to 76 (13). Maximum minute ventilation (Vemax) increased also
from 58.8 (14.8) to 66.1 (15.5) with a p-value of 0.001, while both VO2max and Vemax remained
the same in the non-training control group, which consisted of asthmatic subjects who had been
given information to understand and improve self-management of their asthma. Hallstrand (2000)
also reported that physical training significantly increased VO2max in both the asthma group
(before: 22.73 (4.68) after: 25.29 (4.7) p-value=0.01) and control group (before: 22.94 (4.32) after:
27.85 (5.4) p-value=0.03), which consisted of asthma-free subjects receiving the same treatment
and training intervention, but neither groups achieved significant increases in Vemax. Dogra (2011)
did not report any significant increase in VO2max during the intervention, but during the three
month follow-up by self-administered training there was a significant increase of VO2max in the
exercise asthma group (week 12: 2.88 (0.21) week 24: 3 (0.27)). The non-training control group did
not achieve a significant increase in VO2max. Mendes (2011) measured a significant increase in
VO2max in the training group (before: 73.5 range: 43.6-96.3 after: 88 range: 64.9-109.3), compared
to the control group, which consisted of asthmatic subjects receiving similar treatment as in the
study conducted by Cochrane (1990), but with a breathing exercise program. VO2max in the
control group did not significantly increase. Sonna (2001), who studied US army recruits, showed a
significant increase in VO2max comparing pre- and post-training intervention in both male asthma-
free (before: 50.6 (0.9) after: 52.2 (0.8) p-value=0.01) and female asthma-free subjects (before: 39.1
(0.6) after: 42.3 (0.6) p-value<0.001), but no significant increase was reported among the subjects
with asthma. These results are in contrast to previous studies in which values of VO2max increased
in subjects with and without asthma. In standard assessment tests performed twice a year for all
active-duty personnel (APFT-test), including a push-up event, a sit-up event and a 2-mile run,
asthmatics had a baseline significant lower score on the sit-ups compared to controls (controls: 54
(44-66); asthma: 40 (37-49)), but this difference was not significant at the end of the training
intervention. Emtner (1996) did not use VO2max as a measure for physical fitness, but used a 12
min walking test and a 6 min submax cycle test. The subjects with asthma were placed in an
ordinary conditioned group (OCG) and a less conditioned group (LCG), who had a physical fitness
level lower than the average Swedish population of the same age (Emtner, 1996, 324), and received

7. the same training intervention. Both groups showed a significant increase on the walk test after 10
weeks (From 1293m (61) and 1436m (142), to 1385m (128) and 1540m (134) p-value<0.05), but on
the cycle test only the less conditioned group showed a significant decrease in heart rate 6 min after
the test (before: 165 beats/min (21) after: 152 (22) p-value<0.05). A lower heart rate 6 min after the
cycle test indicates an increase in overall physical fitness.
Training and pulmonary function
To measure any change in respiratory capacity, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV) was
the variable that was most frequently used, but forced vital capacity (FVC) and maximum voluntary
ventilation (MVV) was also sometimes used. Cochrane (1990) measured no significant difference
in FEV pre- and post-study when comparing the exercise group with the non-training controls, but
the exercise group showed a significant difference in FEV after the study period (before: 2.58 (0.68)
after: 2.97 (0.69) p-value<0.01). Hallstrand (2000) did not report any significant respiratory
changes in either the asthma or asthma-free groups, except that the baseline values for MVV was
lower in the asthma group than in the asthma-free group. But there was a trend toward improvement
in MVV for the asthma group comparing values before and after the training intervention. Mendes
(2011) measured no significant changes for the variables in pulmonary function neither for the
exercise nor the control group, nor any differences when comparing them to each other. Sonna
(2001) reported that the asthma group had a significantly lower value of FEV 10 min after the
VO2max-test than pre-exercise values (-23.7% (range: -29.9% to – 15.8%)), which is in accordance
with the study's definition of EIB (decrease of 15% or more in FEV after exercise). But no other
measurement for pulmonary function was significant. In contrast, the asthma-free subjects reported
no significant changes in FEV (+0.3%(range: -2.2% to +2.5%)). In the study conducted by Emtner
(1996), where the asthma subjects were grouped based on their fitness level, OCG and LCG, all
subjects showed a significant increase in FEV and FEV % after the 10 week training trial (FEV:
before: 2.2 (0.8) after: 2.5 (0.7) FEV%: before: 63(22) after: 73 (19) p-value<0.05). Comparing the
LCG with OCG, only the post training intervention value of FEV% for OCG was significantly
better than the value for LCG, which indicates that the ordinary conditioned group improved their
pulmonary function more than the less conditioned group after 10 weeks. Dogra (2011) reported no
significant changes before and after the training intervention for lung function in neither the training
nor non-training groups. Neither were there any significant changes after the follow-up period for
the exercise group as regards pulmonary function.
Training and asthma symptoms and quality of life
Among the studies three of them (Mendes, 2011) (Emtner, 1996) (Dogra, 2011) measured a possible

8. change in asthma symptoms and their severity, while only one study (Dogra, 2011) carried a
questionnaire about the change in quality of life. Emtner (1996) reported that the anxiety and
unfamiliarity with exercise that were found before the training intervention, did significantly
decrease only after two weeks of exercise (p-value<0.05). Then there was no fear of breathlessness
due to training any longer. Mendes (2011) reported the number of asthma-free days after each
month for the control group and the exercise group. The control group had similar number of
asthma-free days during the three month trial (start: 14 days a month (from 5.2 to 24.7)), but the
exercise group showed a significant increase in days without asthma symptoms after one month
(start: 16days a month (from 4 to 28.3) after: 20 days a month, 95% CI (from 4 to 28.2) p-
value<0.001), and this difference was maintained after two and three months of training (24 days
each) compared with baseline and control group values (p-value<0.001). During the intervention
the exercise group also had fewer hospital visits that the control (4 control/1 exercise) and asthma
exacerbations (7 control/1 exercise) (p-value<0.01). Dogra (2011) reported no significant change in
ACQ values in the control group from baseline and after 12 weeks, but there was a significant
difference between baseline values for the control and the exercise group (control group: 1.06 +-
0.10 exercise group: 1.37 +-0.21) (p-value<0.05). Also, ACQ improved significantly after 12 and
maintained after 24 weeks, compared with the control. There also was a significant improvement in
mini-AQLQ from baseline to 24 weeks in the exercise group, in addition to a clinical improvement
of >0.5 in both ACQ and mini-AQLQ from baseline to week 12, and this was maintained to week
24.
Negative effects
Of the studies included in this review, none reported any negative effects or indicated any negative
effects that physical training had on the subjects. Even the study conducted by Emtner (1996), who
had the asthma subjects perform a high intensity interval program, showed no worsening of asthma
symptoms nor any negative changes in any of the measurements included in the review, during or
after the training intervention.

9. Discussion
The results show that physical fitness measures based on VO2max and Vemax did not significantly
increase in all studies. One study reported no increase in VO2max among the subjects with asthma
(Sonna, 2001), but generally the other studies indicate a positive effect from physical activity. Since
the training intervention was limited in time with no or little follow-up, one may assume that a
longer training intervention might have given a more clear and conclusive result. The measures
from pulmonary function were inconclusive: Emtner (1996) reported a significant increase in FEV
in the asthmatics, but a number of the others did not find any significant results (Dogra, 2011),
(Hallstrand, 2000). Some studies reported asthmatics as having lower values for pulmonary function
post- and possible pre- exercise, than their peers, but no study showed a worsening effect as a result
of physical activity. Further studies in this field may give a clearer answer, but the studies included
here indicate that physical activity does not have a clear significant effect on respiratory capacity.
The three studies that measured the change in asthma control and severity, all reported a significant
positive change over time, but they all used different measures (anxiety connected with exercise,
asthma-free days, and questionnaire). The one study that reported change in quality of life found a
positively significant effect of the training intervention (Dogra, 2011), but further studies are needed
to draw a conclusion on the effect of physical activity in quality of life, asthma control, and severity.
On deciding if physical activity has a detrimental effect on asthma and an increasing risk of
developing asthma, none of the included studies reported any negative effect on asthma severity by
physical training, lung function, asthma control, or any other studied parameter. The only study that
focused on the negative effect of physical activity on asthma was Moreira et al. (2011). They
studied the detrimental effect on asthma by physical exercise and the risk of developing asthma and
allergies in Olympic athletes. This study reported an increased prevalence of asthma and allergy
among the athletes. The reason for this result is not clear, since it did not contain any information on
how the study was conducted, the type of training used or the exercise level of the subjects, other
than that they were on an international, Olympic level. The exercise level for this group can safely
be considered as much higher than for the participants in the other groups in the included studies. It
is possible that the activity level in the Olympic group gives a big enough strain on the respiratory
system and the human body in general, to cause a heightened risk of developing asthma and
allergies. Whether this strain is a contributing factor for developing asthma and allergies, would
need further studies in order to reach a defintive conclusion. Obviously only a few can reach and
maintain the level of activity that Olympic athletes do. Accordingly the results from this study may

10. not necessarily be relevant for the general population. Since no negative effects were reported in the
six included interventional studies, one can safely assume that exercising on that level of physical
activity is safe from any negative effects for asthmatics.
The long-term effect of physical activity on asthma remains unclear, however, due to inadequate
follow-up studies and general lack of prospective data collection. Dogra (2011) did a three month
follow-up after the training intervention with self-administered exercise, but it is debatable if this
follow-up was sufficiently long to give any promising long-term data. One study did a 25-year
follow up on the effect of physical activity to delay the decline in pulmonary function (Pelkonen,
2003), but this study focused on asthma-free subjects. It was concluded that continued high physical
activity was associated with lower mortality and a slower decline in pulmonary function compared
to moderate and low physical activity for asthma-free subjects. However, since this was an isolated
study, it cannot be conclusively proven without further long term studies on this subject. Even if this
study may not seem directly relevant to the purpose of this review, it may throw light on the effects
that physical activity has on pulmonary function over a substantial period. If physical activity has
the same effect on pulmonary function for asthma and asthma-free subjects, the results from this
study may also be of vital interest to asthmatics. Of course further studies would be needed to study
if this effect can be achieved, but might imply a huge effect on asthmatics’ quality of life and their
everyday activities.
It has been reported that adults and children with asthma have a lower fitness level than their non-
asthmatic peers, but that this is not caused by the degree of pulmonary obstruction. It is rather a
function of their levels of habitual activity (Lucas, 2005). Many have reported being
symptomatically better when fit, but neither has this been systematically investigated (Ram, 2005,
162). This may be because an increase in aerobic fitness will raise the ventilatory threshold and
require less ventilation during mild and moderate activities. Also improved fitness could reduce the
provocation of asthma symptoms during exercise and everyday activities. The fear of physical
exercise and misinformation, as mentioned earlier in the introduction, may be the reason for this
generally lower level of physical activity, since an overwhelming majority of studies demonstrated
the capacity for asthmatic subjects to exercise safely and to significantly improve their
cardiovascular fitness and quality of life (Lucas, 2005, 933).
Definite and absolute conclusions are difficult to draw from these studies, since they differ so much
from each other in terms of training program and control groups. The duration of training
intervention of the study conducted by Sonna (2001) was only eight weeks, while Dogra (2011)

11. continued for three months and included a three months follow-up. The longer and harder
intervention may be the cause for significant results in Dogra's study, while Sonna’s shorter study
gives no significant results. In addition how long, how often, and how intensive the exercises were
could potentially have an significant effect on the results. The type of exercise used was
fundamental in the effects gained from the training intervention. Aerobics, aerobics combined with
strength training, running, cycling and rowing were some of the types of included exercises in the
studies. These exercises could give a different effect on triggering asthma symptoms, pulmonary
function, and physical fitness. Also, the range of different interventions in the review varied from 30
min duration of each session twice a week (Mendes, 2011) to 60 to 90 min sessions four to five
times a week (Sonna, 2001). Different results from the training intervention in these two studies
would not be surprising: Mendes (2011) might not have achieved a significant effect because of a
lesser level of physical activity than e.g. Sonna (2001) used in his studies. In turn this would have a
big impact on a possible definitive conclusion. In addition, only two of the included studies were
RCTs (Mendes, 2011), (Cochrane, 1990), indicating that these were the only two that could measure
the effect which physical activity may have on asthmatics. They would also be the most reliable
ones in regard to bias. Two of the other studies that used healthy asthma-free subjects in the control
group (Hallstrand, 2000), (Sonna, 2001), only measured if asthmatics could achieve the same effect
from physical activity as their peers. One study divided their subjects in an ordinary conditioned
group and less conditioned group of asthmatics. That entailed a study of possible effects of physical
activity for asthmatics on different fitness levels. With all the different angles from which the
different studies have been conducted, more studies with the same study aim are needed to get a
clearer knowledge of the relation between physical activity and asthma.
In general the studies suffered from small sample sizes. One possible reason for this is the potential
fear and reported anxiety associated with exercise among asthmatics (Emtner, 1996). This anxiety
may scare many possible study subjects away and prevent them for signing up for testing. As a
result this may cause a serious bias in the selection of test subjects. Some studies could have
compensated for this by using a healthy asthma-free control group for a bigger sample size. On the
other hand this would give a different study aim and result, measuring if asthma and asthma-free
subjects can achieve the same effect from training, and not the direct effect of physical training on
asthma. Also, two of the included studies used a percentage of estimated maximum heart rate as a
measure of intensity (Cochrane, 1990), (Emtner, 1996). The estimated maximum heart rate was
calculated by the formula 220 beats/min minus age (in years) (Cochrane, 1990, 325), but this is a
very general and inaccurate way of calculating max heart rate, since it varies much for gender, age,
height, weight and fitness level. This may lead to subjects exercising at a lower or higher intensity

12. than was the target level. To avoid this, the subjects might undergo a maximum heart rate test before
the training intervention to accurately measure maximum heart rate.
The lack of more standarized measures of results and different factors for defining asthma, physical
fitness, and pulmonary function makes it difficult to compare the studies as a basis for a conclusion.
VO2max and FEV were the only measurements for physical fitness and pulmonary function that
were used throughout most studies. One single comparable measure between each factor gives only
a small insight into how training affects asthmatics. Sonna (2001) defined asthma as a decline in
FEV of 15% or more after exercise, some defined it as being diagnosed by a physician, while some
defined it as a person relying on a prescribed medicine for asthma or some form of prophylactic
treatment (Cochrane, 1990). This varying definition of asthma between the studies could include a
wide range of asthmatics with different severity, from one person relying heavily on medication for
everyday activities to a person not needing any medication to live an active life.
The literature search showed that very few articles focused on physical activity in adults with
asthma, and even fewer of them met the inclusion criteria for this review. The varying research
results gathered in this review, small sample sizes, different definitions of asthma, varying training
interventions, little to no follow-ups, no unifying standard for measuring physical fitness and
pulmonary function and, in sum, a shortage of studies on this subject makes it hard to draw
definitive conclusions.

13. Conclusion
There was no indication towards any detrimental effect on asthmatics that underwent the training
intervention, but the results which could indicate a positive effect were inconclusive. In general one
can conclude that physical activity improves physical fitness, for both asthma and asthma-free
subjects, and there seems to be no reason why asthmatics should avoid exercising. The studies that
included change in asthma severity and quality of life reported a positive effect comparing pre- and
post- training intervention. In addition there was very little data on any long term effect. The
inconclusive results from this review may not stem from limitations of the method used, but rather
the available research on the subject that was studied. There were many methodological limitations
in the studies including the small number of asthma subjects included, which limited the reliability
and validity of the results gathered. To give a more conclusive answer, further studies that include
large and well-designed RCTs should be conducted. Investigating potential health benefits through
physical activity for a steadily increasing number of asthmatics worldwide should be given
preference. The outcome of this research could have important impact on asthma control and
quality of life for millions and millions of people.

14. References:
Clark, C. J. (1992) The Role of Physical Training in Asthma. Department of Respiratory Medicine,
Hairmyres Hospital 293s-298s
Cochrane, L. M. & Clark, C. J., (1990) Benefits and problems of a physical training programme for
asthmatic patients. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hairmyres Hospital. Thorax 45:345-351
Dogra, S., Kuk, J. L., Baker, J., & Jamnik, V. (2011) Exercise is associated with improved asthma
control in adults. Eur Respir J 37: 318-323
Emtner, M., Herala, M., & Stålenheim, G. (1996) High-Intensity Physical Training in Adults with
Asthma. Department of Lung Medicine, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala University. CHEST
109:323-330
Hallstrand, T. S., Bates, P. W., & Schoene, R. B. (2000) Aerobic Conditioning in Mild Asthma
Decreases the Hyperpnea of Exercise and Improves Exercise and Ventilatory Capacity 1460-1469
Heikkinen, S. A. M., Quansah, R., Jaakkola, J. J. K., & Jaakkola, M. S. (2012) Effects of regular
exercise on adult asthma. Eur J Epidemiol 27:397-407 doi 10.1007/s10654-012-9684-8
Lucas, S. R., & Platts-Mills, T. A. E. (2005) Physical activity and exercise in asthma: Relevance to
etiology and treatment. American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology doi:
10.1016/j.jaci.2005.01.033
Mendes, F. A. R., Almeida, F. M., Cukier, A., Stelmach, R., Jacob-Filho, W., Martins, M. A., &
Carvalho, C. R. F. (2011) Effects of Aerobic Training on Airway Inflammation in Asthmatic
Patients. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 197-203 doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b13e3181ed0ea3
Moreira, A., Delgado, L., & Carlsen K. (2011) Exercise-induced asthma: why is it so frequent in
Olympic athletes? Expert Rev. Med. 5(1), 1-3
Morton, A. R., & Fitch, K. D. (2011) Australian Association for Exercise and Sports Science
position statement on exercise and asthma. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 14 312-316
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2011.02.009

15. Pelkonen, M., Notkola, I., Lakka, T., Tukiainen, H. O., Kivinen, P., & Nissinen, A., (2003) Delaying
Decline in Pulmonary Function with Physical Activity. Am J Respir Crit Care Med Vol 168. pp 494-
499 doi: 10.1164/rccm.200208-954OC
Ram, F. S. F., Robinson, S. M., & Black, P. N. (2000) Effects of physical training in asthma: a
systematic review. Br J Sports Med 34:162-167
Ram, F. S. F., Robinson, S., Black, P. N., & Picot, J. (2005) Physical training for asthma (Review).
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews issue 4. 1-19 doi:10.1002/1451858.CD001116.pub2.
Sonna, L. A., Angel, K. C., Sharp, M. A., Knapik, J. J., Patton, J. F., & Lilly, C. M. (2001) The
Prevalence of Exercise-induced Bronchospasm Among US Army Recruits and its Effects on
Physical Performance US Army Research Institute of Enviromental Medicine CHEST 119;1676-
1684
Table 1 Characteristics of the studies included in the review and meta-analysis
Author Particip
ants
gender
(male/fe
male)
Intervention programme Measured
outcomes
Exercise
group
Control
group
Number, age*(years),
gender(male/female)
Cochrane
1990
36
(14/22)
Aerobic training, 30 min,
three times a week, three
months, cycling, rowing
aerobics
FEV, VO2max,
Vemax, FEV %
predicted,
VO2max %
18, 27,
NA*
18, 28 NA
Dogra
2011
30 Aerobic traning/strength,
running, cycling, rowing
three times per week for 3
months, then 3 monts self
administered
VO2max,
FEV/FVC % pre
and post exercise,
FEV % predicted
pre post., ACQ*,
mini-AQLQ*
18, 34.2,
5/13
12, 34, 3/9
Emtner
1996
26 Swimming, 45 min, 5 times
a week for 2 weeks, then
twice a weeks for 8 weeks,
10 weeks total
FEV, FEV %
predicted, 12 min
walk test, 6 min
submax.
Ergometry cycle
test
26, 41, 6/20 NA

16. Hallstrand
2000
10 Aerobics, at least 30 min,
three times a week, 10
weeks
FEV, FEV %
predicted, MVV,
MVV %
predicted,
VO2max, Vemax
5, 28.8, 0/5 5, 31, 1/4
Mendes
2011
51 Indoor aerobic exercise, 30
min, twice a week for 3
months, running
VO2max %, FEV
and %, FVC
and %, FEV/FVC,
asthma symptoms
27, 37.9,
3/24
24, 36, 6/18
Sonna
2001
121,
(58/63)
Aerobic/strength training,
60-75 min, 4-6 times a
week, 8 weeks
VO2max, FEV,
APFT*,
8 113
*Age= mean
*NA= not available
*ACQ= validated questionaire for asthma control; <0.75 well-controlled asthma, 0.75-1.5 relatively
well-controlled asthma, >1.5 poorly controlled asthma.
*mini-AQLQ= Quality of Life Questionaire: higher scores indicates better quality of life
*APFT= army assessment of physical fitness; as many push ups in 2 min, sit ups in 2 min and timed
2 mile run. Score from 1 to 100.
*FEV= forced expiratory volume in one second
*FEV %= percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in one second
*FVC= forced vital capacity
*MVV= maximum voluntary ventilation
*MVV %= percentage of predicted maximum voluntary ventilation
*VO2max= maximum oxygen consumption (ml kg^-1min^-1)
*Vemax= maximum minute ventilation (L min^-1)