Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) may help middle-aged and older adults resist age-related neurodegenerative conditions and psychiatric disorders. Recent studies suggested that Traditional Chinese exercises (TCEs) may be a promising strategy to improve the BDNF levels of these populations, while the effectiveness has yet to be definitively confirmed due to the variances in the study designs and observations. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of TCEs intervention on BDNF in middle-aged and older adults. The search was conducted in November 2024 in seven Chinese and English databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed the search results, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed to determine the overall effect size and the impact of potential moderators. Ten publications consisting of 543 participants were included. The overall effect size of TCEs on BDNF was large and significant [Hedges'g = 0.82, 95 % CI (0.55, 1.09), p < 0.01]. Subgroup analysis revealed that the effect size was non-significant for participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (p = 0.08), while significant for participants with normal cognitive function (p < 0.01). In the meta-regression, moderators such as the mean age, sex, and baseline BDNF levels of participants, as well as total TCEs time were not associated with outcome variables. The certainty of the evidence was assessed as moderate. This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that TCEs intervention could increase the levels of BDNF in middle-aged and older adults with normal cognitive function. www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42023484121.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of lower limb ischemic preconditioning (IPC/LL) on aerobic capacity in healthy adults. The search was conducted in five electronic databases. Two authors independently reviewed the search results, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Meta-analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to determine the overall effect size and the impact of potential moderators. Twenty publications consisting of 297 participants were included. The overall analysis showed that time to exhaustion was significantly improved after IPC/LL intervention compared with the control (Hedges' g = 0.40, 95% CI (0.16, 0.64), p < 0.01). In subgroup analysis, time to exhaustion was significantly improved only in single-pass intervention conditions, in untrained participants, and assessed by cycling exercise tests ( p < 0.05). However, no significant effect was observed on time trial performance (Hedges' g = −0.08, 95% CI (−0.33, 0.16), p = 0.50), peak oxygen uptake (Hedges' g = 0.02, 95% CI (−0.17, 0.21), p = 0.85), and blood lactate (Hedges' g = 0.09, 95% CI (−0.06, 0.23), p = 0.26) in healthy adults after IPC/LL intervention. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides moderate evidence that IPC/LL does not improve the aerobic capacity of healthy adults but contributes to an enhancement in time to exhaustion during aerobic exercise.

Objectives: Nordic walking (NW), as a specialized form of aerobic exercise, emerges as a promising strategy to improve the cognitive function in older population. However, the effectiveness of NW has yet to be definitively confirmed due to the variances in the study designs and observations. This systematic review and meta-analysis was thus conducted to examine the effect of NW interventions on cognitive function of older adults.Methods: The search was conducted in August 2025 on Web of Science, PubMed, SPORT-Discus, Medline, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed the search results, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed to determine the overall effect size and the impact of potential moderators.Results: Initial screening identified 336 records, and after full-text assessment, eight studies (from 2014 to 2024) comprising 327 participants (71.19 ± 5.44 yrs) were included. The effect size of NW on executive function was significant [Hedges’ g = 0.89, 95% CI (0.27, 1.50), p = 0.01], while the effects were non-significant for global function, memory function, attention, information processing, and perceptual ability (p > 0.05). Subgroup analysis indicated that the health conditions of participants and the types of control groups significantly moderated executive function. Specifically, NW showed significant improvements (i) in older adults with health conditions and (ii) compared with inactive control groups (p = 0.04). Meta-regression revealed a significant positive correlation between the total intervention time of NW and its effect size (p < 0.01).Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that NW interventions could improve executive function in older adults, especially those with health conditions.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42025638467.

Background: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) may be a promising strategy to improve aerobic capacity in healthy adults, while such effects have not been comprehensively characterized. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of IPC intervention on aerobic capacity in healthy adults. Methods: Studies with randomized controlled or crossover designs exploring the effects of IPC as compared to no intervention or placebo control on time trial performance (TTP), time to exhaustion (TTE), maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂max), peak oxygen uptake (VO₂peak), and blood lactate (BLA) in healthy adults were included. The data (M ± SD) were extracted from included studies and converted into mean difference (MD) by calculating fixed-effect meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was used to examine the characteristics of IPC intervention, participants, and exercise tests. Results: Twenty publications consisting of 297 participants were included. The overall analysis showed that TTE significantly improved after IPC intervention compared with the control [MD = 31.78, 95%CI (17.67, 45.89), P < 0.01]. In subgroup analysis, TTE was significantly improved only in acute intervention conditions [MD = 31.50, 95%CI (17.12, 45.88), P < 0.01], in untrained participants [MD = 50.37, 95%CI (30.47, 70.27), P < 0.01], and assessed by cycling exercise tests [MD = 46.51, 95%CI (26.21, 66.82), P < 0.01]. However, no significant effect was observed on TTP [MD = −1.75, 95%CI (−8.79, 5.29), P = 0.63], VO₂max/VO₂peak [MD = 0.10, 95%CI (−1.02, 1.21), P = 0.87], and BLA [MD = 0.26, 95%CI (−0.05, 0.57), P = 0.10] in healthy adults after IPC intervention. Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides moderate evidence that IPC intervention cannot induce significant improvement in aerobic capacity, but it improves the tolerance of the training intensity and fatigue recovery in healthy adults. IPC intervention might be effective (i) in acute intervention conditions, (ii) in untrained athletes or beginner athletes, and (iii) in exercises dominated by the muscles at the position of the intervention. Systematic review registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42023407412.

Time-efficient strategies are needed to enhance physical fitness in sedentary university students. This pilot study examined the preliminary effects of maximal-effort stair-climbing exercise snacks performed alone (ESA) or combined with practical blood flow restriction (ES + BFR). Twenty-three sedentary male university students were included in the per-protocol analysis (ESA, n = 7; ES + BFR, n = 8; control, n = 8). Over 4 weeks, both intervention groups completed 48 supervised sessions, each consisting of three 20 s maximal stair climbs separated by 2 min rest. Assessed outcomes were forced vital capacity (FVC), 50 m sprint time, 1000 m run time, standing long jump (SLJ), sit-and-reach flexibility, and body mass index (BMI). Group × Time interactions were tested using mixed-model ANOVA. Significant interactions emerged for all metrics (p ≤ 0.01, partial η² = 0.35–0.70), except BMI. Both interventions significantly improved FVC, flexibility, 1000 m run and 50 m sprint performance (p < 0.05; absolute Cohen’s d range = 1.01–2.68). Although no significant between-group differences were observed, ES + BFR produced larger within-group effect sizes than ESA for 1000 m run time (d = −2.14 vs. −1.66) and 50 m sprint time (d = −2.21 vs. −1.89). Only ES + BFR significantly increased SLJ (p < 0.05), whereas the control group exhibited a significant decline (p < 0.05). BMI remained unchanged. The 4-week stair-climbing exercise snack protocol is feasible and may improve pulmonary function, endurance, speed, and flexibility in sedentary male students. Adding practical BFR shows promising numerical benefits for sprint, power, and endurance performance, but these exploratory findings require confirmation in larger trials.

Background: Low-intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction (LIRT-BFR) may improve musculoskeletal function, but its effects in musculoskeletal disorders remain uncertain. Objective: To examine LIRT-BFR effects on lower-limb muscle size, strength, and mobility in musculoskeletal disorders, and explore potential effect modifiers. Methods: Five databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE) were searched from inception to November 20, 2025. Randomized controlled trials involving adults with musculoskeletal disorders comparing LIRT-BFR to control or active interventions were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results: Sixteen trials (638 participants) were included. Compared with non-exercise controls, LIRT-BFR significantly improved lower-limb muscle strength (g = 1.20, 95% CI [0.54, 1.87]), muscle size (g = 1.65, 95% CI [0.88, 2.43]), and lower-limb functionality (TUG: g = -0.73, 95% CI [-1.21, -0.24]; TST: g = 1.85, 95% CI [1.19, 2.52]). Compared with LIRT alone, LIRT-BFR improved muscle strength (g = 0.56, 95% CI 0.08–1.04) and timed-stands performance (g = 0.86, 95% CI 0.44–1.28). No advantage over MHIRT was observed for muscle strength (g = -0.10, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.28) or timed-stands performance (g = -0.50, 95% CI -1.01 to 0.01). Exploratory analyses showed favorable point estimates for 12-18 sessions and non-failure protocols. Certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low across comparator-specific outcomes. Conclusions: LIRT-BFR improves lower-limb muscle and functional outcomes relative to non-exercise controls and may provide additional benefits over LIRT for selected outcomes. No advantage over MHIRT was identified. Clinical heterogeneity, wide prediction intervals, and risk of bias warrant cautious interpretation.