Jodi N Dowthwaite1, Deena M Weiss2, Jill Thein-Nissenbaum3, Tamara A Scerpella1,4. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, N.Y. 2. University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health (UWSMPH), Madison, WI. 3. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, UWSMPH, Madison, WI. 4. Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, UWSMPH, Madison, WI.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The current analysis evaluates cumulative benefits after year two (Y2) of a school-based resistance training intervention. METHODS: Adolescent girls were enrolled and measured at the beginning of 6th grade (baseline, BL) and again at 1st follow-up (FU1: Y1 end) and 2nd follow-up (FU2: Y2 end). School gym classes met alternate school days. Site 1 had standard gym classes (CON). Site 2 gym classes included 8-12 minutes of resistance training (INT); INT girls were categorized based on observed participation effort and time (LO, HI). Measurements included: 1) height and weight; 2) questionnaires to assess extracurricular exercise and diet (calcium, vitamin D); 3) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA, Lunar Prodigy). Whole body less head (SUB) scans yielded bone mineral content (BMC) and body composition. Lumbar spine (L1-L4) and femoral neck (FN) scans yielded BMC and areal bone mineral density (BMD); radius scans yielded ultradistal and 1/3 BMD. ANCOVA compared group means for percent gains from BL to FU2, accounting for biological maturity, BL height, height change, inter-scan interval, organized activity, calcium and vitamin D. RESULTS: In 62 girls (21 CON, 41 INT), intention to treat analyses detected INT vs. CON advantages for L1-L4 BMC and BMD (4.1%, 5.6%: p<0.05). HI effort participants (n=19) demonstrated advantages for BMC and BMD at L1-L4 and FN (5.7% to 8.2%, p<0.01) vs. CON. CONCLUSIONS: Over two school years, this resistance intervention yielded lumbar spine advantages; enthusiastic participation (HI) yielded lumbar spine and femoral neck advantages. Further work is warranted to evaluate benefit persistence after intervention cessation.
PURPOSE: The current analysis evaluates cumulative benefits after year two (Y2) of a school-based resistance training intervention. METHODS: Adolescent girls were enrolled and measured at the beginning of 6th grade (baseline, BL) and again at 1st follow-up (FU1: Y1 end) and 2nd follow-up (FU2: Y2 end). School gym classes met alternate school days. Site 1 had standard gym classes (CON). Site 2 gym classes included 8-12 minutes of resistance training (INT); INT girls were categorized based on observed participation effort and time (LO, HI). Measurements included: 1) height and weight; 2) questionnaires to assess extracurricular exercise and diet (calcium, vitamin D); 3) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA, Lunar Prodigy). Whole body less head (SUB) scans yielded bone mineral content (BMC) and body composition. Lumbar spine (L1-L4) and femoral neck (FN) scans yielded BMC and areal bone mineral density (BMD); radius scans yielded ultradistal and 1/3 BMD. ANCOVA compared group means for percent gains from BL to FU2, accounting for biological maturity, BL height, height change, inter-scan interval, organized activity, calcium and vitamin D. RESULTS: In 62 girls (21 CON, 41 INT), intention to treat analyses detected INT vs. CON advantages for L1-L4 BMC and BMD (4.1%, 5.6%: p<0.05). HI effort participants (n=19) demonstrated advantages for BMC and BMD at L1-L4 and FN (5.7% to 8.2%, p<0.01) vs. CON. CONCLUSIONS: Over two school years, this resistance intervention yielded lumbar spine advantages; enthusiastic participation (HI) yielded lumbar spine and femoral neck advantages. Further work is warranted to evaluate benefit persistence after intervention cessation.
Entities:
Keywords:
DXA; bone growth; exercise; female; osteoporosis prevention; pediatric
Authors: Marta C Erlandson; Saija A Kontulainen; Phil D Chilibeck; Cathy M Arnold; Robert A Faulkner; Adam D G Baxter-Jones Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Rachel L Duckham; Adam D G Baxter-Jones; James D Johnston; Hassanali Vatanparast; David Cooper; Saija Kontulainen Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Anna R Rasmussen; Christine Wohlfahrt-Veje; Katrine Tefre de Renzy-Martin; Casper P Hagen; Jeanette Tinggaard; Annette Mouritsen; Mikkel G Mieritz; Katharina M Main Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-12-22 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Geneviève Leduc; Jo-Anne Gilbert; Alexandra Ayotte; Nicolas Moreau; Vicky Drapeau; Jean Lemoyne; Johana Monthuy-Blanc; Jonathan Tremblay; Marie-Eve Mathieu Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 3.295