Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Long-term impact of strength training on muscle strength characteristics in older adults
Kennis E, Verschueren SM, Bogaerts A, van Roie E, Boonen S, Delecluse C
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2013 Nov;94(11):2054-2060
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term preventive impact of strength training on muscle performance in older adults. DESIGN: A 7-year follow-up on a 1-year randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of combined resistance training and aerobic training and whole-body vibration training on muscle performance. SETTING: University training center. PARTICIPANTS: Men and women (n = 83; control (CON) group, n = 27; strength-training intervention (INT) group, n = 56) between 60 and 80 years of age. INTERVENTIONS: The INT group exercised 3 times weekly during 1 year, performing a combined resistance training and aerobic training program or a whole-body vibration training program. The former training program was designed according to American College of Sports Medicine guidelines. The whole-body vibration training program included unloaded static and dynamic leg exercises on a vibration platform. The CON group did not participate in any training program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Static strength (STAT), dynamic strength at 60 degrees/s (DYN60) and at 240 degrees/s (DYN240), speed of movement at 20% (S20). RESULTS: From baseline to postintervention, muscle performance did not change in the CON group, except for S20 (+6.55% +/- 2.88%, p < 0.001). One year of strength training increased (p <= 0.001) STAT (+11.46% +/- 1.86%), DYN60 (+6.96% +/- 1.65%), DYN240 (+9.25% +/- 1.68%), and S20 (+7.73% +/- 2.19%) in the INT group. Between baseline and follow-up, muscle performance decreased (p < 0.001) in both groups. However, STAT and DYN60 showed a significantly lower loss in the INT group (-8.65% +/- 2.35% and -7.10% +/- 2.38%, respectively) compared with the CON group (-16.47% +/- 2.69% and -15.08% +/- 2.27%, respectively). This positive impact might be due to the preservation of the training-induced gains, given the similar annual decline rates in both groups from postintervention to follow-up. Additionally, in trained participants, aging seems to impact velocity-dependent strength and power more compared with basic strength, as the total losses in DYN240 (CON -15.93% +/- 2.64%; INT -11.39% +/- 1.95%) and S20 (CON -14.39% +/- 2.10%; INT -13.16% +/- 1.72%) did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: A 1-year strength-training intervention results in an improved muscle performance in older adults 7 years after their enrollment in the intervention. However, an extensive exercise program cannot attenuate the age-related decline once the intervention stops.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help