411
Effects of tai chi on type 2 diabetes
Fig. 3. Forest plot of the effects of tai chi on glycosylated haemoglobin. (A) All included studies; (B) all studies except for Bao’s and Wu’s research;
StudyID: study reference; Tn: number of participants in treatment group; Cn: number of participants in control group; WMD: weighted mean
difference; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.
Balance. Two studies (43, 50) comprising 3 interven-
tion groups evaluated the effects of tai chi on balance
according to the duration of single-leg stance. A ran-
dom-effects pooled analysis revealed no effects of tai
chi on increasing the duration of single-leg stance (MD
2.71s; 95% CI –3.29 to 8.71 s; p = 0.376; heterogeneity,
I 2 = 63.8%, p = 0.063; Fig. 7B).
Blood pressure. Five studies (38, 42, 45, 48, 53)
compared the effects of tai chi on BMI with a control
group. The results of meta-analysis indicated there was
a statistically significant reduction in SBP (MD –10.03
mmHg; 95% CI –15.78 to –4.29 mmHg; p = 0.001;
heterogeneity, I 2 = 55.4%, p = 0.062; Fig. 8A) and DBP
(MD –4.85 mmHg; 95% CI –8.23 to –1.47 mmHg;
p = 0.005; heterogeneity, I 2 = 33.1%, p = 0.201; Fig. 8B).
Quality of life. Five studies (41, 43, 45, 46, 48) compa-
red the effects of tai chi on QoL with a control group.
A pooled analysis suggested that tai chi improved
physical function (MD 7.07; 95% CI 0.79–13.35;
p = 0.027; heterogeneity, I 2 = 79.6%, p = 0.001; Fig. 9A),
bodily pain (MD 4.30; 95% CI 0.83–7.77; p = 0.015;
heterogeneity, I 2 = 39.2%, p = 0.160; Fig. 9B) and social
function (MD 13.84; 95% CI 6.22––21.47; p < 0.001;
heterogeneity, I 2 = 86.0%, p = 0.063; Fig. 9C).
Publication bias and sensitivity analysis
The results of funnel plot (Fig. 10) and Egger’s test
(t = –1.93, p = 0.064) suggested there was no publica-
tion bias across studies. Sensitivity analysis revealed
that tai chi potentially had beneficial effects in reducing
FPG (SMD –0.62; 95% CI –0.84 to –0.39; p < 0.001),
decreasing HbA1c (MD –0.89%; 95% CI –1.49% to
–0.29%; p = 0.003), lowering BMI (MD –0.83 kg/m 2 ;
95% CI –1.30 to –0.37 kg/m 2 ; p = 0.001; heterogeneity,
I 2 = 38.1%, p = 0.152) and TC (SMD –0.45; 95% CI
J Rehabil Med 51, 2019