Sarah Cheour1, Chouaib Cheour1, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi2, Liye Zou3, Armin H Paravlic4,5, Maamer Slimani6,7, Foued Cheour8. 1. High Institute of Sport and Education of Sfax, Sfax 3000, Tunisia. 2. Laboratory for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (LIAM), Department of Mathematics and Statistics, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada. 3. College of Psychology and Sociology, Exercise and Mental Health Laboratory, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China. 4. Institute of Kinesiology Research, Science and Research Centre, SI-6000 Koper, Slovenia. 5. Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. 6. Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DINOGMI), Section of Psychiatry, Genoa University, 16126 Genoa, Italy. 7. School of Public Health, Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL), Genoa University, 16126 Genoa, Italy. 8. High Institute of Applied Biology of Médenine, Medenine 4119, Tunisia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to quantify the effectiveness of endurance training (ET) on aerobic performance (i.e., peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak)) in healthy and unhealthy middle and very old adults aged 70 years and older, and to provide dose-response relationships of training prescription variables (in terms of frequency, and volume). METHODS: Several scholarly databases (i.e., PubMed/MEDLINE, SpringerLink, ScienceDirect Journals, and Taylor & Francis Online-Journals) were searched, identifying randomized controlled studies that investigated the effectiveness of ET on VO2peak in older adults. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. RESULTS: In terms of changes differences between experimental and control group, ET produced significant large effects on VO2peak performance (SMD = 2.64 (95%CI 0.97-4.31)). The moderator analysis revealed that "health status" variable moderated ET effect onVO2peak performance. More specifically, ET produced larger SMD magnitudes on VO2peak performance in healthy compared with unhealthy individuals. With regard to the dose-response relationships, findings from the meta-regression showed that none of the included training prescription variables predicted ET effects on VO2peak performance. CONCLUSIONS: ET is an effective mean for improving aerobic performance in healthy older adults when compared with their unhealthy counterparts.
BACKGROUND: The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to quantify the effectiveness of endurance training (ET) on aerobic performance (i.e., peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak)) in healthy and unhealthy middle and very old adults aged 70 years and older, and to provide dose-response relationships of training prescription variables (in terms of frequency, and volume). METHODS: Several scholarly databases (i.e., PubMed/MEDLINE, SpringerLink, ScienceDirect Journals, and Taylor & Francis Online-Journals) were searched, identifying randomized controlled studies that investigated the effectiveness of ET on VO2peak in older adults. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. RESULTS: In terms of changes differences between experimental and control group, ET produced significant large effects on VO2peak performance (SMD = 2.64 (95%CI 0.97-4.31)). The moderator analysis revealed that "health status" variable moderated ET effect onVO2peak performance. More specifically, ET produced larger SMD magnitudes on VO2peak performance in healthy compared with unhealthy individuals. With regard to the dose-response relationships, findings from the meta-regression showed that none of the included training prescription variables predicted ET effects on VO2peak performance. CONCLUSIONS:ET is an effective mean for improving aerobic performance in healthy older adults when compared with their unhealthy counterparts.
Entities:
Keywords:
dose–response relationship; elderly; exercise; physical activity training prescriptions; physical endurance; physical fitness; systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Robert H Coker; Rick H Williams; Patrick M Kortebein; Dennis H Sullivan; William J Evans Journal: Metab Syndr Relat Disord Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 1.894
Authors: Abdulla Watad; Nicola Luigi Bragazzi; Mohammad Adawi; Howard Amital; Elias Toubi; Bat-Sheva Porat; Yehuda Shoenfeld Journal: Gerontology Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 5.140
Authors: W Kyle Mitchell; John Williams; Philip Atherton; Mike Larvin; John Lund; Marco Narici Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Morgan N Clennin; Jonathan P W Payne; Edgardo G Rienzi; Carl J Lavie; Steven N Blair; Russell R Pate; Xuemei Sui Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 3.240
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