Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Effect of different load intensity transition schemes on muscular strength and physical performance in postmenopausal women |
Carneiro MAS, Kassiano W, Oliveira-Junior G, Sousa JFR, Cyrino ES, Orsatti FL |
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 2023 Aug;55(8):1507-1523 |
clinical trial |
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; 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* |
PURPOSE: In postmenopausal women, optimizing muscular strength and physical performance through proper resistance training (RT) is crucial in achieving optimal functional reserve later in life. This study aimed to compare if a higher-load-to-lower-load (HL to LL) scheme is more effective than a lower-load-to-higher-load (LL to HL) scheme on muscular strength and physical performance in postmenopausal women after 12 and 24 wk of RT. METHODS: Twenty-four postmenopausal women were randomized into two groups: LL to HL (n = 12, 27 to 31 repetitions maximum (RM) in the first 12 wk, and 8 to 12RM in the last 12 wk) or HL to LL (n = 12, 8 to 12RM during the first 12 wk, and 27 to 31RM in the last 12 wk). Muscular dynamic (1RM test) and isometric strength (MIVC) and functional tests (sit-to-stand power, 400-m walking, and 6-min walking) were analyzed at baseline, after 12 and 24 wk. RESULTS: Different load intensity transition schemes resulted in enhancements (p < 0.05) in dynamic (45 degree leg press LL to HL 21.98% versus HL to LL 16.07%; leg extension LL to HL 23.25% versus HL to LL 16.28%; leg curl LL to HL 23.89% versus HL to LL 13.34%) and isometric strength (LL to HL 14.63% versus HL to LL 19.42%), sit-to-stand power (LL to HL 7.32% versus HL to LL 0%), and walking speed (400-m test LL to HL 3.30% versus HL to LL 5.52%; 6-min test LL to HL 4.44% versus HL to LL 5.55%) after 24wk of RT, without differences between groups (p > 0.05). However, only the HL increased the dynamic strength in 45 degree leg press and leg extension and sit-to-stand power. Moreover, walking speed changes were more strongly correlated with the changes in MIVC (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that both load intensity transition schemes produce similar improvements in muscular strength and physical performance in postmenopausal women after 24 wk of RT. However, the HL was more effective in increasing 45 degree leg press and leg extension strength, as well as power (mainly when performed after the LL), whereas having little effect on leg curl strength, isometric strength, and walking speed. Our findings suggest that although an HL makes a muscle isotonically stronger, it may have limited impact on isometric strength and walking speed in postmenopausal women.
|