OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of two different schemes of loading in resistance training on bone mineral density (BMD) and pain in pretrained postmenopausal women. METHODS:53 pretrained women (mean (SD) age 58.2 (3.7) years) who carried out a mixed resistance and gymnastics programme were randomly assigned to a strength training (ST) or power training (PT) group. The difference between the two groups was the movement velocity during the resistance training (ST, 4 s (concentric)/4 s (eccentric); PT, explosive/4 s). Otherwise both groups carried out periodised progressive resistance training (10-12 exercises, 2-4 sets, 4-12 repetitions at 70-92.5% of the one-repetition maximum (2/week) for 2 years. Mechanical loading was determined with a force measuring plate during the leg press exercise. At baseline and after 2 years, BMD was measured at different sites with dual x-ray absorptiometry. Pain was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS:Loading magnitude, loading/unloading rate, loading amplitude and loading frequency differed significantly (p<0.001) between the two groups. After 2 years, significant between-group differences were detected for BMD (PT, -0.3%; ST, -2.4%; p<0.05) and bone area (PT, 0.4%; ST, -0.9%; p<0.05) at the lumbar spine. At the hip, there was a non-significant trend in favour of the PT group. Also the incidence of pain indicators at the lumbar spine was more favourable in the PT group. CONCLUSION: The results show that PT may be superior for maintaining BMD in postmenopausal women. Furthermore, PT was safe as it did not lead to increased injury or pain.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of two different schemes of loading in resistance training on bone mineral density (BMD) and pain in pretrained postmenopausal women. METHODS: 53 pretrained women (mean (SD) age 58.2 (3.7) years) who carried out a mixed resistance and gymnastics programme were randomly assigned to a strength training (ST) or power training (PT) group. The difference between the two groups was the movement velocity during the resistance training (ST, 4 s (concentric)/4 s (eccentric); PT, explosive/4 s). Otherwise both groups carried out periodised progressive resistance training (10-12 exercises, 2-4 sets, 4-12 repetitions at 70-92.5% of the one-repetition maximum (2/week) for 2 years. Mechanical loading was determined with a force measuring plate during the leg press exercise. At baseline and after 2 years, BMD was measured at different sites with dual x-ray absorptiometry. Pain was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Loading magnitude, loading/unloading rate, loading amplitude and loading frequency differed significantly (p<0.001) between the two groups. After 2 years, significant between-group differences were detected for BMD (PT, -0.3%; ST, -2.4%; p<0.05) and bone area (PT, 0.4%; ST, -0.9%; p<0.05) at the lumbar spine. At the hip, there was a non-significant trend in favour of the PT group. Also the incidence of pain indicators at the lumbar spine was more favourable in the PT group. CONCLUSION: The results show that PT may be superior for maintaining BMD in postmenopausal women. Furthermore, PT was safe as it did not lead to increased injury or pain.
Authors: Robin M Daly; Jack Dalla Via; Rachel L Duckham; Steve F Fraser; Eva Wulff Helge Journal: Braz J Phys Ther Date: 2018-11-22 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Timo Rantalainen; M Hoffrén; V Linnamo; A Heinonen; P V Komi; J Avela; B C Nindl Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2011-02-06 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: U Gast; D L Belavý; G Armbrecht; K Kusy; H Lexy; R Rawer; J Rittweger; K Winwood; J Zieliński; D Felsenberg Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2012-12-15 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Peter Krustrup; Eva Wulff Helge; Peter R Hansen; Per Aagaard; Marie Hagman; Morten B Randers; Maysa de Sousa; Magni Mohr Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: William J Kraemer; Nicholas A Ratamess; Shawn D Flanagan; Jason P Shurley; Janice S Todd; Terry C Todd Journal: Sports Med Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Maureen E Lynch; Russell P Main; Qian Xu; Thomas L Schmicker; Mitchell B Schaffler; Timothy M Wright; Marjolein C H van der Meulen Journal: Bone Date: 2011-05-27 Impact factor: 4.398