Bettina Johnen1, Nadja Schott2. 1. Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Allmandring 28, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany. 2. Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Allmandring 28, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany. nadja.schott@inspo.uni-stuttgart.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Resistance training holds promise for nursing home residents to prevent further disabilities, falls, and fractures. Free weight as well as machine training may offer an efficient option to improve physical performance, but the feasibility of these training regimes among elderly who require continuous institutional care is still open. AIMS: (1) To examine the feasibility of a 3-month machine vs. free weight strength training program in institutionalized older adults, and (2) to determine the effects on physical performance. METHODS: This study is a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled feasibility study within a nursing home. 45 institutionalized elderly men and women (aged 83.8 ± 8.0, 12 men, 33 women) were randomly divided into two groups. The two groups completed either a free weight (FWT) or machine training (MT) for 12 weeks, twice per week, 45-60 min per session, in an individually supervised format. Performance was assessed with the 11-step stair-climbing test, 10-m walk test, Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), 30-s Chair Rising Test (CRT), grip strength, body mass index. RESULTS: Indices of feasibility showed a recruitment and adherence rate of 53.6 and 87.5%, respectively. 35.6% of the participants dropped out after several weeks for personal reasons, illness, medical visits, or hospital stays. After the program no significant differences on motor performance were found between MT and FWT. However, there were significant improvements for both training groups on the TUG and the CRT. CONCLUSIONS: The present pilot study showed that it is feasible to conduct a strength training program in institutionalized participants. The more robust changes in motor function could serve as a basis for large randomized clinical trials.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Resistance training holds promise for nursing home residents to prevent further disabilities, falls, and fractures. Free weight as well as machine training may offer an efficient option to improve physical performance, but the feasibility of these training regimes among elderly who require continuous institutional care is still open. AIMS: (1) To examine the feasibility of a 3-month machine vs. free weight strength training program in institutionalized older adults, and (2) to determine the effects on physical performance. METHODS: This study is a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled feasibility study within a nursing home. 45 institutionalized elderly men and women (aged 83.8 ± 8.0, 12 men, 33 women) were randomly divided into two groups. The two groups completed either a free weight (FWT) or machine training (MT) for 12 weeks, twice per week, 45-60 min per session, in an individually supervised format. Performance was assessed with the 11-step stair-climbing test, 10-m walk test, Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), 30-s Chair Rising Test (CRT), grip strength, body mass index. RESULTS: Indices of feasibility showed a recruitment and adherence rate of 53.6 and 87.5%, respectively. 35.6% of the participants dropped out after several weeks for personal reasons, illness, medical visits, or hospital stays. After the program no significant differences on motor performance were found between MT and FWT. However, there were significant improvements for both training groups on the TUG and the CRT. CONCLUSIONS: The present pilot study showed that it is feasible to conduct a strength training program in institutionalized participants. The more robust changes in motor function could serve as a basis for large randomized clinical trials.
Entities:
Keywords:
Elderly; Muscle strength; Nursing home; Resistance training
Authors: Luis Galhardas; Armando Raimundo; Jesús Del Pozo-Cruz; José Marmeleira Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Laura L Bischoff; Thomas Cordes; Charlotte Meixner; Daniel Schoene; Claudia Voelcker-Rehage; Bettina Wollesen Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-06-14 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Antonina Kaczorowska; Anna Sebastjan; Małgorzata Kołodziej; Małgorzata Fortuna; Zofia Ignasiak Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-12 Impact factor: 3.390