| Literature DB >> 29529070 |
Mirco Floreani1,2, Enrico Rejc1,3, Paolo Taboga1,4, Alessandro Ganzini1,2, Rado Pišot5, Bostjan Šimunič5, Gianni Biolo6, Carlo Reggiani7, Angelina Passaro8, Marco Narici9, Joern Rittweger10,11, Pietro Enrico di Prampero1,2, Stefano Lazzer1,2.
Abstract
In this study, we investigated: i) the effects of bed rest and a subsequent physical training program on metabolic cost (Cw), mechanical work and efficiency during walking in older and young men; ii) the mechanisms underlying the higher Cw observed in older than young men.Twenty-three healthy male subjects (N = 16 older adults, age 59.6±3.4 years; N = 7 young, age: 23.1±2.9 years) participated in this study. The subjects underwent 14 days of bed rest followed by two weeks of physical training (6 sessions). Cw, mechanical work, efficiency, and co-contraction time of proximal muscles (vastus lateralis and biceps femoris) and distal muscles (gastrocnemius medialis and tibialis anterior) were measured during walking at 0.83, 1.11, 1.39, 1.67 m·s-1 before bed rest (pre-BR), after bed rest (post-BR) and after physical training (post-PT).No effects of bed rest and physical training were observed on the analysed parameters in either group. Older men showed higher Cw and lower efficiency at each speed (average +25.1 and -20.5%, P<0.001, respectively) compared to young. Co-contraction time of proximal and distal muscles were higher in older than in young men across the different walking speeds (average +30.0 and +110.3%, P<0.05, respectively).The lack of bed rest and physical training effects on the parameters analyzed in this study may be explained by the healthy status of both young and older men, which could have mitigated the effects of these interventions on walking motor function. On the other hand, the fact that older adults showed greater Cw, overall higher co-contraction time of antagonist lower limb muscles, and lower efficiency compared to the young cohort throughout a wide range of walking speed may suggest that older adults sacrificed economy of walking to improve stability.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29529070 PMCID: PMC5847238 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Physical characteristics of older (N = 16) and young (N = 7) subjects before bed rest (Pre-BR), after bed rest (Post-BR), and after 2 weeks of physical training (Post-PT).
| Older (n = 16) | Young (n = 7) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-BR | Post-BR | Post-PT | Pre-BR | Post-BR | Post-PT | G | T | G x T | |
| Age (y) | 59.6 ± 3.4 | 23.1 ± 2.9 | 0.001 | ||||||
| Stature (m) | 1.73 ± 0.05 | 1.77 ± 0.07 | 0.192 | ||||||
| Body mass (kg) | 79.9 ± 12.3 | 77.5 ± 11.7 | 79.3 ± 11.6 | 74.8 ± 8.8 | 71.6 ± 8.3 | 74.4 ± 8.1 | 0.310 | 0.001 | 0.352 |
| Body mass index (kg·m-2) | 26.6 ±4.4 | 25.8 ± 4.1 | 26.5 ± 4.2 | 24.0 ± 2.4 | 22.9 ± 2.1 | 23.8 ± 2.2 | 0.142 | 0.018 | 0.284 |
Results are in mean ± SD. Significance by GLM of the main effects of Group (Older vs Young), Time (Pre-BR vs Post-BR vs Post-PT) and Group x Time interaction (G x T).
Fig 1Averaged values of metabolic cost of walking (Cw, A), respiratory exchange ratio (RER, B) and heart rate (HR, C) across time (pre-BR, post-BR and post-PT) as a function of speed, in older (-●-) and young (- o -) subjects (see statistics paragraph). (The lines represent mean values obtained before (solid line) and after (dashed line) bed rest, and 14 days after physical training (dotted line) in older (red full circle) and young (blue open circle) subjects). Results are in mean ± SD. *: P < 0.001, Older group is significantly different than Young at a given speed. #: P < 0.001, values at given speeds are significantly different than at 0.83 m · s-1. GLM results reported in main text.
Metabolic, mechanical work and electromyography recordings results of General Linear Model repeated measures with three factors considering group (G: Older vs young), time (T: Pre-BR vs Post-BR vs Post-PT), speeds (considering four different speeds, S: 0.83 vs 1.11 vs 1.39 vs 1.67 m·s-1) and interaction (G x T x S).
| Group | Time | Speeds | G x T x S | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metabolic cost of walking | 0.001 | 0.141 | 0.001 | 0.849 |
| Respiratory exchange ratio | 0.001 | 0.141 | 0.001 | 0.344 |
| Heart rate | 0.146 | 0.302 | 0.001 | 0.658 |
| External work | 0.004 | 0.370 | 0.001 | 0.628 |
| Internal work | 0.687 | 0.328 | 0.001 | 0.582 |
| Total work | 0.016 | 0.981 | 0.001 | 0.650 |
| Recovery | 0.017 | 0.836 | 0.001 | 0.977 |
| Stride Frequency | 0.042 | 0.911 | 0.001 | 0.123 |
| Efficiency | 0.001 | 0.734 | 0.001 | 0.498 |
| Proximal co-contraction time | 0.038 | 0.797 | 0.001 | 0.310 |
| Distal co-contraction time | 0.043 | 0.707 | 0.001 | 0.238 |
Fig 2Averaged values of external work (W, A), internal work (W, B), total work (W, C), recovery (R, D), stride frequency (SF, E) and efficiency (EFF, F) across time (pre-BR, post-BR and post-PT) as a function of speed, in older (-●-) and young (- o -) subjects (see statistics paragraph). (The lines represent mean values obtained before (solid line) and after (dashed line) bed rest, and 14 days after physical training (dotted line) in older (red full circle) and young (blue open circle) subjects). Results are in mean ± SD. *: P < 0.05, Older group is significantly different than Young at a given speed. #: P < 0.001, values at given speeds are significantly different than at 0.83 m · s-1. GLM results reported in main text.
Fig 3Averaged values of proximal ( (The lines represent mean values obtained before (solid line) and after (dashed line) bed rest, and 14 days after physical training (dotted line) in older (red full circle) and young (blue open circle) subjects). Results are in mean ± SD. *: P < 0.05, Older group is significantly different than Young at a given speed. #: P < 0.001, values at given speeds are significantly different than at 0.83 m · s-1. GLM results reported in main text.