Background: Cardiac autonomic neuropathy is a common complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), that can be measured through heart rate variability (HRV)–known to be decreased in T2DM. Physical exercise can improve HRV in healthy population, however results are under debate in T2DM. We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of physical exercise on HRV in T2DM patients. Method: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and ScienceDirect databases were searched for all studies reporting HRV parameters in T2DM patients before and after exercise training, until September 20th 2020, without limitation to specific years. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis stratified by type of exercise for each of the HRV parameters: RR–intervals (or Normal to Normal intervals–NN), standard deviation of RR intervals (SDNN), percentage of adjacent NN intervals varying by more than 50 milliseconds (pNN50), root mean square of successive RR-intervals differences (RMSSD), total power, Low Frequency (LF), High Frequency (HF) and LF/HF ratio. Sensitivity analyses were computed on studies with the highest quality. Results: We included 21 studies (9 were randomized) for a total of 523 T2DM patients: 472 had an exercise training and 151 were controls (no exercise). Intervention was endurance (14 studies), resistance (2 studies), endurance combined with resistance (4 studies), and high intensity interval training (HIIT) (4 studies). After exercise training, all HRV parameters improved i.e. an increase in SDNN (effect size = 0.59, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.93), RMSSD (0.62, 0.28 to 0.95), pNN50 (0.62, 0.23 to 1.00), HF (0.58, -0.16 to 0.99), and a decrease in LF (-0.37, -0.69 to -0.05) and LF/HF (-0.52, -0.79 to -0.24). There were no changes in controls. Stratification by type of exercise showed an improvement in most HRV parameters (SDNN, RMSSD, pNN50, LF, HF, LF/HF) after endurance training, whereas mostly LF/HF was improved after both resistance training and HIIT. Supervised training improved most HRV parameters. Duration and frequency of training did not influence the benefits on HRV. Conclusion: Exercise training improved HRV parameters in T2DM patients which may reflect an improvement in the activity of the autonomic nervous system. The level of proof is the highest for endurance training. Supervised training seemed beneficial.

Background: Myopia is a global public health problem affecting quality of life and work productivity. Data is scarce regarding the effects of near work on myopia. Providing a larger meta-analysis with life-long perspective, including adults and occupational exposure seemed needed. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Science Direct for studies reporting myopia prevalence in near work. Myopia was defined as a mean spherical equivalent ≤ −0.50 diopter. We performed a meta-analysis using random-effects model on myopia prevalence, myopia progression per year, and odds ratio (OR) of myopia in near work, completed by subgroup analyses and meta-regressions on patients’ characteristics, type of work in adults, geographic zones, time and characteristics of near work. Results: We included 78 studies, representing a total of 254,037 participants, aged from 6 to 39 years. The global prevalence of myopia in near work was 35% (95% CI: 30 to 41%), with a prevalence of 31% (95% CI: 26 to 37%) in children and 46% (95% CI: 30 to 62%) in adults. Myopia progression was −0.39 diopters per year (−0.53 to −0.24 D/year), ranging from −0.44 (−0.57 to −0.31) in children to −0.25 D/year (−0.56 to 0.06) in adults. The odds of myopia in workers exposed vs. non-exposed to near work were increased by 26% (18 to 34%), by 31% (21 to 42%) in children and 21% (6 to 35%) in adults. Prevalence of myopia was higher in adults compared to children (Coefficient 0.15, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.27). Conclusions: Near work conditions, including occupational exposure in adults, could be associated with myopia. Targeted prevention should be implemented in the workplace.

Background: Exercise therapy is recommended to treat non-specific low back pain (LBP). Home-based exercises are promising way to mitigate the lack of availability of exercise centers. In this paper, we conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis on the effects of home-based exercise on pain and functional limitation in LBP. Method: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and ScienceDirect were searched until April 20th, 2021. In order to be selected, studies needed to report the pain and functional limitation of patients before and after home-based exercise or after exercise both in a center and at-home. Random-effect meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted. Results: We included 33 studies and 9588 patients. We found that pain intensity decreased in the exclusive home exercise group (Effect size = −0.89. 95% CI −0.99 to −0.80) and in the group which conducted exercise both at-home and at another setting (−0.73. −0.86 to −0.59). Similarly, functional limitation also decreased in both groups (−0.75. −0.91 to −0.60, and −0.70, −0.92 to −0.48, respectively). Relaxation and postural exercise seemed to be ineffective in decreasing pain intensity, whereas trunk, pelvic or leg stretching decreased pain intensity. Yoga improved functional limitation. Supervised training was the most effective method to improve pain intensity. Insufficient data precluded robust conclusions around the duration and frequency of the sessions and program. Conclusion: Home-based exercise training improved pain intensity and functional limitation parameters in LBP.

Background: Exercise induced health benefits are limited by the overaccumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). ROS and further oxidative stress could potentially induce muscle damage which could result in poor exercise performance. However, predicting ROS induced oxidative stress in response to endurance training has several limitations in terms of selecting biomarkers that are used to measure oxidative stress.Objective: The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate the suitable biomarkers that predict oxidative stress status among runners.Methods: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, a search for relevant articles was carried out on PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar using related search terms such as oxidative damage, ROS, exercise, physical training, running, marathon, and ultramarathon.Results: Outcomes included (1) running programs like a half-marathon, ultramarathon, and iron-man race, (2) measuring biochemical assessment of oxidative damage markers such as malondialdehyde (MDA), protein carbonyl (PC), total antioxidant capacity (TAC), thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), 8-Oxo-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OH-dG), 4-hydroxynonenal (HNE), and F1-isoprostones, and enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants level.Conclusions: This study concluded that a running exercise does not elicit a response to specific biomarkers of oxidative stress, instead, oxidative damage markers of lipids, proteins, and various enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants are expressed according to the training status of the individual.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has initiated an upheaval in society and has been the cause of considerable stress during this period. Healthcare professionals have been on the front line during this health crisis, particularly paramedical staff. The aim of this study was to assess the high level of stress of healthcare workers during the first wave of the pandemic. Materials and methods: The COVISTRESS international study is a questionnaire disseminated online collecting demographic and stress-related data over the globe, during the pandemic. Stress levels were evaluated using non-calibrated visual analog scale, from 0 (no stress) to 100 (maximal stress). Results: Among the 13,537 individuals from 44 countries who completed the survey from January to June 2020, we included 10,051 workers (including 1379 healthcare workers, 631 medical doctors and 748 paramedical staff). The stress levels during the first wave of the pandemic were 57.8 ± 33 in the whole cohort, 65.3 ± 29.1 in medical doctors, and 73.6 ± 27.7 in paramedical staff. Healthcare professionals and especially paramedical staff had the highest levels of stress (p < 0.001 vs non-healthcare workers). Across all occupational categories, women had systematically significantly higher levels of work-related stress than men (p < 0.001). There was a negative correlation between age and stress level (r = -0.098, p < 0.001). Healthcare professionals demonstrated an increased risk of very-high stress levels (>80) compared to other workers (OR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.87–2.41). Paramedical staff risk for very-high levels of stress was higher than doctors’ (1.88, 1.50–2.34). The risk of high levels of stress also increased in women (1.83, 1.61–2.09; p < 0.001 vs. men) and in people aged <50 (1.45, 1.26–1.66; p < 0.001 vs. aged >50). Conclusions: The first wave of the pandemic was a major stressful event for healthcare workers, especially paramedical staff. Among individuals, women were the most at risk while age was a protective factor.