Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Resistance training prescription with different load-management methods improves phase angle in older women [with consumer summary] |
Ribeiro AS, Schoenfeld BJ, Souza MF, Tomeleri CM, Silva AM, Teixeira DC, Sardinha LB, Cyrino ES |
European Journal of Sport Science 2017;17(7):913-921 |
clinical trial |
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of two different resistance training (RT) prescription methods on phase angle (PA) in older women. Seventy-six older women (68.5 +/- 5.7 years) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: two training groups that performed an eight-week RT programme either in a constant load (CT, n = 25) or an ascending pyramidal load (PR, n = 26) routine three times per week, or a control group (CG, n = 25) that performed no exercise. The CT programme consisted of three sets of 8 to 12 repetition maximum (RM) with a constant load for the three sets, whereas the PR training consisted of three sets of 12/10/8 RM with incremental loads for each set. PA was assessed by whole-body spectral bioelectrical impedance. After the RT period, both CT and PR achieved higher (p < 0.05) values of PA (CT 5.76 +/- 0.59degree, PR 5.63 +/- 0.61degree, CG 5.48 +/- 0.46degree) compared to the CG; however, there was no difference (p > 0.05) between trained groups. The results suggest that eight weeks of RT based on a PR and CT load routines promote an improvement in PA, and both prescription methods performed similarly.
|