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

Detailed Search Results

Effects of high-velocity circuit resistance and treadmill training on cardiometabolic risk, blood markers, and quality of life in older adults
Roberson K, Potiaumpai M, Widdowson K, Jaghab A, Chowdhari S, Armitage C, Seeley A, Jacobs K, Signorile J
Physiologie Appliquee Nutrition et Metabolisme [Applied Physiology, Nutrition, & Metabolism] 2018 Aug;43(8):822-832
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; 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*

The presence of cardiometabolic syndrome (CMS) confers an increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality and is associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the effects of exercise on biomarkers, HRQoL, and future risk have been studied, no study has measured the effects on all three components. The present study compared the effects of steady-state, moderate-intensity treadmill training (TM) and high-velocity circuit resistance training (HVCRT) on biological markers, HRQoL, and overall CVD risk in adults with CMS and CVD risk factors. Thirty participants (22 females, 8 males) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: HVCRT, TM, or control. Participants in the exercise groups attended training 3 days/week for a total of 12 weeks. Of the 30 participants who began the study, 24 (19 females, 5 males) were included in the final analysis. Primary outcome measures included CMS criteria, hemodynamic measures, Framingham Risk Score (FRS), and HRQoL. All variables were measured pre- and post-intervention. CMS z score significantly decreased for HVCRT (p = 0.03), while there were no significant changes for TM or control. FRS significantly decreased for HVCRT compared with TM (p = 0.03) and control (p = 0.03). Significant decreases in systolic (p < 0.01) and diastolic blood pressures (p < 0.01) for HVCRT accompanied significant increases from baseline in stroke volume (p = 0.03) and end-diastolic volume (p < 0.01). Systemic vascular resistance significantly decreased (p = 0.05) for HVCRT compared with control. Emotional well-being significantly improved following HVCRT and TM compared with control (p = 0.04; p = 0.03). HVCRT represents a novel training modality that improved factors in each of the 3 components assessed.

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