Home-based supervised exercise versus hospital-based supervised exercise or unsupervised walk advice as treatment for intermittent claudication: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effects of home-based supervised exercise vs hospital-based supervised exercise, and the effects of home-based supervised exercise vs unsupervised "go home and walk advice" on daily life and corridor-walking capacity, health-related quality of life and patient-reported functional walking capacity in patients with intermittent claudication. DATA SOURCES Systematic literature searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, ProQuest, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the Cochrane Library, and a number of Health Technology Assessment (HTA)-databases in October 2014. STUDY SELECTION Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials (> 100 patients) were considered for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION Data extraction and risk of bias assessment was performed independently and discussed in meetings. DATA SYNTHESIS Seven randomized controlled trials and 2 non-randomized controlled studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The included studies had some, or major, limitations. CONCLUSION Based on a low quality of evidence, home-based supervised exercise may lead to less improvement in maximum and pain-free walking distance, and in more improvement in daily life walking capacity, compared with hospital-based supervised exercise. Home-based supervised exercise may improve maximum and pain-free walking distance compared with "go home and walk advice" and result in little or no difference in health-related quality of life and functional walking capacity compared with hospital-based supervised exercise or "go home and walk advice". Further research is needed to establish the optimal exercise modality for these patients.