Catherine Giuliano1, Amalia Karahalios2, Christopher Neil3, Jason Allen4, Itamar Levinger5. 1. Clinical Exercise Science Research Program, Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living (ISEAL), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia; Western Health, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: Catherine.giuliano@vu.edu.au. 2. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: emily.karahalios@unimelb.edu.au. 3. Clinical Exercise Science Research Program, Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living (ISEAL), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia; Western Health, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Medicine-Western Precinct at the University of Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: Christopher.neil@wh.org.au. 4. Clinical Exercise Science Research Program, Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living (ISEAL), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia; Western Health, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: Jason.allen@vu.edu.au. 5. Clinical Exercise Science Research Program, Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living (ISEAL), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia; Western Health, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Cardiology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: Itamar.levinger@vu.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resistance training (RT) has been utilised to target muscle dysfunction associated with Chronic Heart Failure (CHF). However, there is limited meta-analysis evidence to support its use as a standalone therapy. This meta-analysis examined the effects of RT on muscle strength (one repetition maximum, 1RM and Peak Torque), aerobic capacity (VO2peak and 6min walk distance) and quality of life (QoL) in patients with CHF. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and CINAHL for studies published up to July 2016, combining terms related to the population (eg, heart failure, CHF) with terms for the intervention (eg, resistance, strength training) and the outcomes (eg, QoL, VO2peak,strength, aerobic capacity). RESULTS: Ten studies including 240 participants were included in our meta-analysis (aged 48-76years, Ejection Fraction 18-37%). Training duration ranged from 8 to 24weeks and intensity up to 80% of 1RM. RT increased 1RM (standardised change score=0.60; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.43, 0.77) but not strength measured via peak torque at 60°/s-1 and 180°/s-1. RT increased VO2peak (CSMD: 2.71ml/kg/min; 1.96, 3.45) and QoL (CSMD: -5.71; -9.85, -1.56). CONCLUSION: RT as a single intervention can increase muscle strength, aerobic capacity and QoL in patients with CHF and may offer an alternative approach, particularly for those unable to participate in aerobic training. The effect of RT on muscle strength is mainly during slow controlled movements and not during rapid movements. Older adults and patients with advanced CHF are underrepresented in RT trials and future studies should seek to optimise their inclusion.
BACKGROUND: Resistance training (RT) has been utilised to target muscle dysfunction associated with Chronic Heart Failure (CHF). However, there is limited meta-analysis evidence to support its use as a standalone therapy. This meta-analysis examined the effects of RT on muscle strength (one repetition maximum, 1RM and Peak Torque), aerobic capacity (VO2peak and 6min walk distance) and quality of life (QoL) in patients with CHF. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and CINAHL for studies published up to July 2016, combining terms related to the population (eg, heart failure, CHF) with terms for the intervention (eg, resistance, strength training) and the outcomes (eg, QoL, VO2peak,strength, aerobic capacity). RESULTS: Ten studies including 240 participants were included in our meta-analysis (aged 48-76years, Ejection Fraction 18-37%). Training duration ranged from 8 to 24weeks and intensity up to 80% of 1RM. RT increased 1RM (standardised change score=0.60; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.43, 0.77) but not strength measured via peak torque at 60°/s-1 and 180°/s-1. RT increased VO2peak (CSMD: 2.71ml/kg/min; 1.96, 3.45) and QoL (CSMD: -5.71; -9.85, -1.56). CONCLUSION: RT as a single intervention can increase muscle strength, aerobic capacity and QoL in patients with CHF and may offer an alternative approach, particularly for those unable to participate in aerobic training. The effect of RT on muscle strength is mainly during slow controlled movements and not during rapid movements. Older adults and patients with advanced CHF are underrepresented in RT trials and future studies should seek to optimise their inclusion.
Authors: Michael Scharf; Derya Oezdemir; Axel Schmid; Wolfgang Kemmler; Simon von Stengel; Matthias S May; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Olga Ribeiro-Torres; Arilson Fernandes M de Sousa; Eliseo Iglesias-Soler; Maelán Fontes-Villalba; Hassane Zouhal; François Carré; Carl Foster; Daniel Boullosa Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2020-05-28 Impact factor: 2.430
Authors: Maamer Slimani; Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo; Armin Paravlic; Lawrence D Hayes; Nicola Luigi Bragazzi; Maha Sellami Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 4.566