Practical Recommendations for Maintaining Active Lifestyle during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Literature Review

  1. Ellen Bentlage
  2. Achraf Ammar
  3. Daniella How
  4. Mona Ahmed
  5. Khaled Trabelsi
  6. Hamdi Chtourou
  7. Michael Brach

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Diminished volumes of habitual physical activity and increased sedentary levels have been observed as a result of COVID-19 home-confinement. Consequences of inactivity, including a higher mortality rate and poorer general health and fitness, have been reported. This systematic review aimed to provide practical recommendations for maintaining active lifestyles during pandemics. In May 2020, two electronic databases (PubMed; Web of Science) were used to search for relevant studies. A total of 1206 records were screened by two researchers. Thirty-one relevant studies were included in this systematic review, in which the methodological quality was assessed. With regard to six studies, which explicitly dealt with physical activity during COVID-19, the evidence level is classified by three articles to level II, and in the other three to level VI. Regarding the physical activity recommendations in these papers, three of them were classified to a medium, and the same number to a weak evidence base. Of the 25 papers which refer to other pandemics and/or isolation situations, one was classified to evidence level I, four were ranged to level II, three to level III, one to level V, and the others to level VI. This systematic review revealed that reduced physical activity levels are of serious concern during home confinement in pandemic times. The recommendations provided by many international organizations to maintain active lifestyles during these times mainly target the general population, with less consideration for vulnerable populations (e.g., older adults, people with health issues). Therefore, personalized and supervised physical activity programs are urgently needed, with the option to group-play physical activity programs (e.g., exergames). These can be assisted, delivered, and disseminated worldwide through information and communication technology solutions. If it is permitted and safe, being active outside in daylight is advised, with an effort level of mild to moderate using the rating of perceived exertion scale. Relaxation techniques should be integrated into the daily routine to reduce stress levels. On the evidence base and levels of the included articles in this review, the results need to be interpreted with caution. Given that policies are different across regions and countries, further research is needed to categorize recommendations according to different social-distancing scenarios.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.24.20138313: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Three were MeSH Terms.
    MeSH
    suggested: (MeSH, RRID:SCR_004750)
    The final search term for Pubmed was (“patient isolation”[MeSH Terms] OR “social isolation”[MeSH Terms] OR “confinement” [Title/Abstract] OR “pandemics”[MeSH Terms]) AND (“exercise”[Title/Abstract] OR “sports”[Title/Abstract] OR “physical activity”[Title/Abstract]).
    Pubmed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)
    We found 585 studies in PubMed/MEDLINE and 857 in the Web of Science (See Prisma Flow Diagram, figure 1).
    PubMed/MEDLINE
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.3390/ijerph17176265
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.24.20138313v1 on medRxiv