Show Notes
Welcome Back Rheumatology Fans, I had the ABSOLUTE pleasure to talk to Jean-Pascal Grenier who published this great review on high-intensity exercise and Rheumatic Diseases. You can find Jean-Pascal on LinkedIn or Research Gate or Instagram Full Article Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41566885/ Clinical Takeaways From The Podcast • High-intensity exercise is not harmful for people with rheumatic disease according to current evidence. • Outcomes such as pain, disability, and function are at least as good with high-intensity exercise as with lower-intensity approaches. • Some functional outcomes (e.g., activities of daily living tests) may actually improve more with higher-intensity interventions. • Persistent clinical caution around intensity may reflect historical beliefs rather than current evidence. • Exercise prescription should still be individualised, considering disease activity, patient confidence, and training tolerance rather than relying on blanket intensity restrictions. Podcast Summary In this episode of The Rheumatology Physio Podcast, Jack is joined by researcher Jean-Pascal Grenier (JP) to explore a long-standing clinical question: Is high-intensity exercise harmful for people with rheumatic disease? The short answer, according to JP’s recent review, is no. The conversation unpacks evidence examining high-intensity exercise interventions across conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and other rheumatic diseases. High intensity was broadly defined in the literature as exercise performed at ≥70% of maximum heart rate, including aerobic training, resistance training, and interval-based protocols. Across the studies reviewed, high-intensity exercise was found to be at least as effective as low- or moderate-intensity approaches for key outcomes such as pain, function, and disability. In several secondary outcomes—including activities of daily living and functional capacity tests—high-intensity exercise even showed superior improvements in some patient groups. JP explains that the motivation for the review came from a persistent culture of caution around exercise for inflammatory disease. Patients are often advised to “take it easy” or avoid heavy exertion due to concerns about joint damage or disease flares. However, the evidence does not support the idea that higher exercise intensities are harmful. Instead, the discussion highlights a mismatch between clinical messaging and available evidence. While exercise is widely recommended in rheumatology guidelines, caveats around intensity often remain despite limited supporting data. Ultimately, the episode reframes the conversation around exercise prescription in rheumatology. Rather than defaulting to conservative, low-intensity programmes, clinicians may be able to confidently consider higher-intensity training when appropriate, recognising that patient preference, tolerance, and individual context still matter. If you subscribe to Physio Matters Advanced Practice you immediately gain full access to my Online Course, paid posts on substack and 2 EBooks!
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rheumatologyphysio.substack.com/subscribe
More from Rheumatology.Physio Podcast
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rheumatologyphysio.substack.com
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rheumatologyphysio.substack.com
Welcome Back Rheumatology Fans, Ooof this is going to rattle some cages. Synopsis below but the best of this is watching the video. A recent news report about a woman with rheumatoid arthritis who was convicted of benefit fraud caught my attention. The case involved footage of her participating in activities including gym classes and running events despite having previously reported substantial limitations in her day-to-day function. I don’t know enough about the individual circumstances to comment on whether the judgement was appropriate. In fact, the reported offence appears to relate specifically to failing to notify the Department for Work and Pensions of a change in circumstances. But the story raises a broader issue that is highly relevant to people living with inflammatory arthritis and the clinicians treating them. Being physically active does not necessarily mean someone is not disabled. Rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and other long-term inflammatory diseases can be enormously variable. Symptoms may fluctuate over time, treatments can substantially improve function, and limitations in one activity do not necessarily predict someone’s ability to perform another. Exercise also forms an important part of rehabilitation. I might see someone who currently cannot run, play tennis or golf because their inflammatory arthritis is poorly controlled. Following improvements in medication and a structured rehabilitation programme, one of our explicit treatment goals might be to return them to those activities. For another person, the goal might simply be getting upstairs more comfortably. To achieve that, we may use relatively demanding strengthening exercises in a gym. Seeing that person performing a squat or leg press tells you very little, in isolation, about how easily they can negotiate their stairs later that day. That distinction matters. We should not create an environment where people receiving appropriate financial support become frightened of exercising because they worry that being seen in a gym, lifting weights or participating in sport could somehow be interpreted as evidence that they are no longer disabled. From a clinical perspective, I want people with inflammatory arthritis to be as active as their condition, preferences and circumstances allow. Where possible, that includes meeting general physical activity recommendations and incorporating cardiovascular and resistance exercise. There are good reasons for doing so. Maintaining physical activity can help protect muscle and bone, improve cardiovascular health and support broader long-term health outcomes. For some patients, returning to demanding exercise is itself a major marker of successful treatment. None of this means that changes in someone’s circumstances should not be reported where required. That is a separate issue. The important point is that exercise capacity and disability are not opposites. A person can exercise and still experience meaningful restrictions from inflammatory disease. They can also improve dramatically with treatment while continuing to have limitations elsewhere. As clinicians, we should be encouraging people towards greater function—not inadvertently giving them another reason to be afraid of achieving it.
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rheumatologyphysio.substack.com
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rheumatologyphysio.substack.com