Skip to main content
. 2009 Jul 8;2009(3):CD002759. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002759.pub2

5. Adverse events.

Study Any Comment re: AE AE Occurred (y/n/nr) Description Dropout Pathologies Pain Medical Care Deaths
Ades 1996 No     None reported      
Baker 2001 Yes No NR Yes, 2 in treatment group (neck arthritis, prior back injury), 2 in control (illness, psoriatic arthritis) Treatment group decreased in WOMAC, SF‐36 BP no change NR  
Balagopal 2001 No     NR      
Ballor 1996 No     NR      
Barrett 2002 Yes Yes 2 in PRT group, aggravation of OA 2 in PRT group, aggravation of OA      
Baum 2003 Yes Yes   The number of illness was not reported. 13% of repeated measurements after baseline were missing because of death or patient inability to perform the test because of acute illness.     1 in the PRT group
Bean 2004 Yes no No significant adverse events occurred        
Beneka 2005 No NR          
Bermon 1999 No     No      
Boshuizen 2005 Yes yes   9 dropout due to illness of participant or partner 4 reported pain during or after the exercise   1 in control
Brandon 2000 No       NR NR  
Brandon 2003 Yes 8 members of exercise group had BP raised to over 200 mmHg systolic or 100 mmHg diastolic at some point during the exercises during 24 months; and had to stop exercising that day   Participant's disease (diabetics) got worse; specific number was not reported      
Brochu 2002 Yes Yes 2 experienced occasional significant exacerbation of arthritic conditions during the training. 1 experienced significant dizziness in a supine position. Yes, 3 due to medical problems that are not related to the training 2 individuals experienced occasional significant exacerbation of arthritic conditions during the training NR NR
Bruunsgaard 2004 No NR          
Buchner 1997 Yes Yes 6 Injuries in strength training or in strength/endurance training group (not reported separately, n = 50) Not described no significant change in BP of SF‐36 For all exercise groups (i.e. including endurance exercise groups): stable outpatient visits in exercise group/ control increased, no difference in hospitalisation rates  
Casaburi 2004 Yes No   5 (group?)‐non protocol related health problems NR    
Castaneda 2001 Yes No   No      
Castaneda 2004 Yes Yes   The authors did not report the number and group of the dropouts. The statement is "reasons for early termination of the study included loss of greater than 20% of initial body weight, need for dialysis therapy or transplantation, development of a serious condition requiring hospitalization or precluding exercise and signs of malnutrition"      
Chandler 1998 No     9 drop‐outs due to illness, 1 due to increased hip pain, 1 refused further strength testing (not given by group) NR NR  
Charette 1991 No     1 discomfort after initial strength testing, 3 intercurrent illness not related to training NR NR  
Chin A Paw 2006 Yes Yes None withdrew because of adverse effects 9 illness in PRT; 9 illness in functional training group; 10 illness in combined training group; 6 illness in control group     1 in PRT; 4 in functional training; 1 in combined training; 2 in control group
Collier 1997 No     No      
Damush 1999 No     6 exercise drop‐outs due to illness      
de Vos 2005 Yes Yes 20 AEs reported in 17 participants. 16 were related to strength testing and 4 were related to power training. 8 were in high intensity group, 7 in medium, 4 in low, and 1 in control. AEs included minor strains, tendonities, and exacerbation of osteoarthritis. 4 (1 in each group) dropout‐joint pain 
 1 inguinal hernia in medium intensity group. 1 medical reason in low intensity group Joint pain (see dropout pathologies)    
de Vreede 2007 Yes Yes PRT: 1 had muscle strained. 10 reported muscle pain, 5 osteoarthritic joint pain, 3 prosthetic joint pain, and 4 lower back pain PRT group: 1 hip fracture, 1 pneumonia, & 1 eye operation. Control: 1 wrist fracture PRT: 10 reported muscle pain, 5 osteoarthritic joint pain, 3 prosthetic joint pain, and 4 lower back pain    
DeBeliso 2005 Yes no no injuries occurred during the training        
DiFrancisco 2007 Yes No Occasionally complaints of muscle soreness for 2 days after exercise, but it did not affect participants' daily routine or training        
Donald 2000 No     not clear      
Earles 2001 Yes (a priori outcome) Yes 4 reported discomfort, 2 stopped program ‐ 1 due to back pain, 1 due to lumbar disc herniation, possibly due to study intervention Yes      
Ettinger 1997 Yes Yes PRT: 2 falls, one weight dropped on foot; Aerobic: 2 falls; Control: 1 sudden death (defined AE as death or injury requiring medical care) NR less for PRT group vs control NR NR
Fahlman 2002 No NR          
Fatouros 2002 No NR          
Fatouros 2005 Yes Yes   3 men stopped within the 1st week due to injury      
Fiatarone 1997 No     1 exercise drop‐out due to increased musculoskeletal pain NR no difference in health care visits between groups NR
Fiatarone 1994 Yes Yes PRT: 2 reports of joint pain, program was altered No control info No cardiovascular events 2 exercise drop outs, 1 due to musculoskeletal pain, 1 due to pneumonia not measured NR 0 PRT and 1 control
Fielding 2002 Yes yes see the dropout pathologies 4 (2 in each group) discontinued secondary to exacerbation of preexist OA. 1 in the high velocity group withdrew secondary to recurrence of chronic plantar fasciicis      
Flynn 1999 No     NR NR NR NR
Foley 2003 Yes Yes Gym‐based exercise group: 2 had increased pain and 1 had increased blood pressure. 1 ‐Dr. advised to cease program Gym‐based exercise group: 2 with increased pain, 1 with unrelated surgery, 1 with increased blood pressure, and 1 had joint replacement surgery. Control group: 2 with joint replacement surgery and 1 with illness. 2 reported increased pain the gym‐based exercise group.    
Frontera 2003 No NR          
Galvao 2005 Yes No 1 in 1‐set group withdrew due to illness, 1 due to injury sustained during part‐time work, and 1 due to aggravation of a preexisting hip injury        
Hagerman 2000 No     3 PRT and 1 control withdrew because of minor injuries or previous medical problems exacerbated by testing/training "no complaints of excess or intolerable muscle soreness or fatigue" NR NR
Harris 2004 Yes No          
Haykowsky 2005 Yes Yes   1 in PRT withdrew because of shoulder discomfort and migraines. 1 in the combination training suffered a lower extremity injury not related to the study      
Haykowsky 2000 Yes No (completed without complications)   NR      
Hennessey 2001 No     NR      
Hepple 1997 No     No      
Hiatt 1994 No     No      
Hortobagyi 2001 No (not identified as such) Yes Pain and bruising of shoulder from machine ‐ dropped out Yes Yes NR NR
Hruda 2003 Yes Yes?   5 (2 in the PRT group and 3 in the control group) dropped out due to health reasons      
Hunter 2001 No     NR      
Izquierdo 2004 No NR          
Jette 1996 No (not identified as such)     Yes ‐ 2 drop‐outs because of the exercises, 1 due to back pain, 1 due to shortness of breath during exercise,      
Jette 1999 Yes No   Reasons not described NR, but fatigue significantly worse in exercise group NR NR
Jones 1994 Yes No   NR      
Jubrias 2001 Yes No   NR      
Judge 1994 Yes (a priori outcome of study) Yes 10/55 people in RT or combined balance and RT developed musculoskeletal complaints, (specific details given), only 1 complaint in balance group, no control report, no serious injuries in any group NR NR    
Kalapotharakos 2005 NR NR          
Kallinen 2002 Yes Yes 1‐PRT, died of myocardial infarction at 8 weeks; 1‐PRT, unstable angina at 4 weeks; 1 in PRT, began to have occasional angina and dyspnoea at 8 weeks; 1‐endurance, brainstem infarction at week 9, 1‐endurance, abnormal aortic aneurysm happened after the program See the description     1 in PRT, died of myocardial infarction
Katznelson 2006 Yes Yes   5 were due to events unrelated to study drug, including bruised ribs, need for knee replacement, angina prior to the baseline visit, nausea during the first week of the study, and excessive i e commitments. Another subject in the placebo arm withdrew because of depression.      
Kerr 2001 No     Yes ‐ 3 in FITNESS group, including wrist and back injury      
Kongsgaard 2004 No NR          
Krebs 2007 Yes Yes 1 in the PRT group sustained an unrelated fall halfway through the 6‐week intervention, resulting in injury of her dominate shoulder. Exercise was modified for her.        
Lamoureux 2003 No NR          
Latham 2001 Yes No   No      
Latham 2003 Yes (a priori outcome) Yes 18 musculoskeletal adverse events in PRT group vs 5 in control group No     6 in PRT versus 8 in control
Liu‐Ambrose 2005 Yes Yes 10 in PRT group and 2 in stretching control group had minor musculoskeletal complains but resolved or diminished within 3 weeks Yes, 1 in PRT and 1 in control drop out due to illness      
Macaluso 2003 Yes Yes 1 back pain and 1 spur on the heel 1 back pain and 1 spur on the heel 1 back pain    
Madden 2006 No NR          
Maiorana 1997 Yes (safety an aim of study) Yes In ex group: MI (before exercises began),1 vasovagal episode, 1 musculoskeletal pain. Control: 2 people stop testing because of aggravation of psoriatic arthritis(1) and atrial fibrilation (1) Yes, as reported NR NR ‐ ischaemic symptoms/ECG changes during training  
Malliou 2003 No NR          
Mangione 2005 Yes Yes several participants reported muscle soreness or fatigue in the PRT group. 1 fell during post‐training examination, 4 in the PRT were hospitalized in the PRT group, 1‐illness (progressive neuromuscular disorder), 4 were hospitalized. 1 in aerobic training group was unable to perform exercise at recommended intensity level   2 (among those who were hospitalized) in the PRT group
Manini 2005 Yes Yes 11 were excluded from the steadiness experiment because of discomfort from knee OA during the testing protocol. 14 dropout for a variety of medical personal reasons 11 were excluded from the steadiness experiment because of discomfort from knee OA during the testing protocol. 14 others dropped out for a variety of medical and personal reasons.      
Maurer 1999 Yes No   Yes, 4 drop‐outs due to increased pain "but neither subjects nor investigators attributed pain to the treatment" WOMAC pain, 143.8 in PRT vs 167.1 control NR NR
McCartney 1995 Yes No   9 exercise drop‐outs due to "illness", 3 controls due to medical problems. Stated "no injuries as a result of training"      
McGuigan 2001 No     NR      
McMurdo 1995 Yes No   see hosp admissions   3 hospital admissions in PRT, 2 in control, 3 in home mobility ‐ reported not related to exercise 2 in home mobility group, no others ‐ not related to exercise
Mihalko 1996 No     NR      
Mikesky 2006 Yes Yes 1 discontinued in the PRT group because of increased knee pain 1 discontinued in the PRT group because of increased knee pain 1 discontinued in the PRT group because of increased knee pain    
Miller 2006 No NR       Discharge destination ‐ on discharge from acute care, 52 participants were discharged to a rehabilitation programme, 12 were transferred to a community hospital, 16 were discharged to higher level care and 20 returned directly to their pre‐injury admission accommodation. 2 in PRT, 1 in attention control
Miszko 2003 Yes Yes 6 women fell (5 in PRT, 1 in control) some (the number is not specified) due to personal medical reasons or injuries      
Moreland 2001 Yes (a priori outcome) Yes yes to pain or stiffness = 14 in PRT vs 8 in control; other adverse: 8 in PRT vs 3 in control 5 withdrew due to medical complications in PRT vs 3 in control      
Nelson 1994 Yes Yes 7/20 in PRT group experienced transient musculoskeletal pain; 3 musculoskeletal injuries (2 fractures and 1 sprain) in the control group No ‐ MI in PRT group occurred while patient was on vacation      
Newnham 1995 No     No     3 in each group
Nichols 1993 Yes (safety a priori objective) Yes control subject contused sternum during baseline testing, mild to moderate delayed onset muscle soreness PRT ‐ 1 injury unrelated to program      
Ouellette 2004 Yes Yes, 4 events 1 in the PRT group was withdrawn after coronary artery stent placement unrelated to study participation. 2 subjects did not undergo week‐12 strength testing due to recurrence of an inguinal hernia (PRT group) and ECG abnormalities (control group). A fourth subject experienced anginal symptoms consistent with coronary artery disease but returned to the study after medical clearance. Please see the description      
Parkhouse 2000 No     NR      
Pollock 1991 Yes (a‐priori outcome, well‐defined) Yes 11/57 subjects sustained an injury during 1RM testing; 2/23 sustained an injury during training. In aerobic group, no injuries during testing but 9/21 had an injury during training NR by group      
Pu 2001 Yes Yes 1 control patient developed trochanteric bursitis from 1RM testing, 4 people had mild musculoskeletal soreness, no cardiac complications, deaths or hospitalisations occurred No      
Rall 1996 Yes No          
Reeves 2004 No NR          
Rhodes 2000 No     NR      
Sartario 2001 No     NR      
Schilke 1996 No     No decreased in OASI, no difference between groups on AIMS    
Schlicht 1999 Yes No   No      
Segal 2003 No NR          
Selig 2004 Yes yes 1 illness (noncardiac) and 1 died at home in the exercise group       1 in exercise group
Seynnes 2004 Yes No No injuries, medical complications, or study‐related AE 3 dropouts because of medical reasons not related to the study      
Simons 2006 Yes NR 2 dropouts for non‐study related illnesses        
Simoneau 2006 No NR          
Simpson 1992 No     No      
Sims 2006 No No   1 acquired a health problem that prohibited from driving      
Singh 1997 Yes (a priori outcome) No   No weeks of pain reported‐: mean 5.4 (SD=0.7) in PRT, mean 5.6 (SD 0.7) in control health prof visits mean 2.1 (SD 0.4) for PRT; mean 2.0 (SD 0.5) for control; hospital stays mean 0.24 (SD 0.2) for PRT, mean 0.53 (SD 0.4) for control  
Singh 2005 Yes Yes visits to a health professional, minor illness, pain, injuries requiring training adjustment, hospital days, falls 2 drop out in low intensity group due to pain. I in the control due to hospitalisation Muscular pain (number of weeks reported per person): High intensity group‐4.1 (2.7); low intensity group‐2.9 (2.6); control group‐3.6 (2.5) 
 Chest pain (number of weeks reported per person): High intensity group‐ 0.9 (1.9); low‐intensity group‐0.5 (0.9);control group‐.5 (0.8) Visits to a health professional over the study (numbers per person): high intensity group ‐ 2 (2); low intensity group ‐ 2 (1.8); controls ‐ 5 (1.8)  
Sipila 1996 No     3 drop‐outs due to illness "not related to exercise"      
Skelton 1995 Yes No   4 exercise and control participants dropped out because of ill‐health "not related to exercise"      
Skelton 1996 Yes yes patient fainted due to an arythmia during exercise NR      
Sousa 2005 No NR          
Suetta 2004 yes No   2 became ill (1 in PRT) for reasons unrelated to the study      
Sullivan 2005 Yes Yes 7 withdrew, developed an exacerbation of an underlying medical problem 7 withdrew, developed an exacerbation of an underlying medical problem      
Symons 2005 Yes Yes 5 knee discomfort; 1 bruising 5 knee discomfort; 1 bruising      
Taaffe 1996 No     5 drop‐outs from exercise groups for medical problems "not related to the exercise program"      
Taaffe 1999 No     NR      
Topp 1993 No     1 exercise drop‐out due to worsening emphysema, 1 due to a stroke      
Topp 1996 No     NR      
Topp 2002 No NR          
Topp 2005 No NR          
Tracy 2004 No NR          
Tsutsumi 1997 No     NR      
Tyni‐Lenne 2001 Yes Maybe increased oedema in exercise patient No      
Vincent 2002 Yes Yes 6 participants stopped exercise for 6 weeks due to hip/knee pain few (the number is not specified) dropped out for surgery/injury not related to the study protocol.      
Westhoff 2000 Yes (asked about complaints during exercise) Yes increased knee pain in person with OA, 1 person had pain from elastic band 2 drop outs because of medica problems (1 had increased epileptic attacks, 1 was often ill)      
Wieser 2007 No NR          
Wood 2001 No NR stated none of the dropouts left the program as a result of adverse responses to treatment ‐ not information about adverse events overall No