-
Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) Sep 2023Resistance training is an exercise modality that involves using weights or resistance to strengthen and tone muscles. It has become popular in recent years, with... (Review)
Review
Resistance training is an exercise modality that involves using weights or resistance to strengthen and tone muscles. It has become popular in recent years, with numerous people including it in their fitness routines to ameliorate their strength, muscle mass, and overall health. Still, resistance training can be complex, requiring careful planning and execution to avoid injury and achieve satisfactory results. Wearable technology has emerged as a promising tool for resistance training, as it allows monitoring and adjusting training programs in real time. Several wearable devices are currently available, such as smart watches, fitness trackers, and other sensors that can yield detailed physiological and biomechanical information. In resistance training research, this information can be used to assess the effectiveness of training programs and identify areas for improvement. Wearable technology has the potential to revolutionize resistance training research, providing new insights and opportunities for developing optimized training programs. This review examines the types of wearables commonly used in resistance training research, their applications in monitoring and optimizing training programs, and the potential limitations and challenges associated with their use. Finally, it discusses future research directions, including the development of advanced wearable technologies and the integration of artificial intelligence in resistance training research.
PubMed: 37760187
DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10091085 -
Systematic Reviews Nov 2023Prehabilitation programs focusing on exercise training as the main component are known as a promising alternative for improving patients' outcomes before cancer surgery....
BACKGROUND
Prehabilitation programs focusing on exercise training as the main component are known as a promising alternative for improving patients' outcomes before cancer surgery. This systematic review determined the benefits and harms of prehabilitation programs compared with usual care for individuals with cancer.
METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to June 2022, and hand searched clinical trial registries. We included randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in adults, survivors of any type of cancer, that compared prehabilitation programs that had exercise training as the major component with usual care or other active interventions. Outcome measures were health-related quality of life (HRQL), muscular strength, postoperative complications, average length of stay (ALOS), handgrip strength, and physical activity levels. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS
Twenty-five RCTs (2682 participants) published between 2010 and 2022 met our inclusion criteria. Colorectal and lung cancers were the most common diagnoses. The studies had methodological concerns regarding outcome measurement, selective reporting, and attrition. Five prehabilitation programs were compared to usual care (rehabilitation): combined training, aerobic training, respiratory muscle training plus aerobic training, respiratory muscle training plus resistance training, and pelvic floor training. The studies provided no clear evidence of an effect between groups. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as very low, downgraded due to serious study limitations and imprecision.
CONCLUSION
Prehabilitation programs focusing on exercise training may have an effect on adults with cancer, but the evidence is very uncertain. We have very little confidence in the results and the true effect is likely to be substantially different from these. Further research is needed before we can draw a more certain conclusion.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
CRD42019125658.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Preoperative Exercise; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Neoplasms; Resistance Training; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37978411
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02373-4 -
Lipids in Health and Disease Oct 2023The present study analyzes the influence of resistance training (RT) and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on metabolic indices and serum levels of Sirtuin1... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Effect of resistance training and high-intensity interval training on metabolic parameters and serum level of Sirtuin1 in postmenopausal women with metabolic syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
The present study analyzes the influence of resistance training (RT) and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on metabolic indices and serum levels of Sirtuin1 (SIRT1) in postmenopausal women who suffer from the metabolic syndrome (MetS).
METHODS
45 postmenopausal women aged 45-65 years with MetS were divided into two intervention groups (RT and HIIT) and one control group, each consisting of 15 people. The RT group performed resistance training for both the upper and lower body, while the HIIT group completed 3 min(min) of high-intensity training at 80-90% of their maximum heart rate (HRmax), followed by moderate walking for 3 min at 55-65% of HRmax. These sessions were conducted for a duration of eight weeks and three times a week, with the samples being collected at the baseline and at the end of the treatment, i.e., week 8.
RESULTS
The results showed that weight, waist circumference, body mass index, fat mass, low-density lipoprotein, triglyceride, cholesterol, fasting blood sugar (FBS), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C), systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased, and SIRT1 increased significantly in both training groups. Systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, HbA1C, and FBS decreased more in the HIIT group. Skeletal muscle mass and 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) increased more in the RT group.
CONCLUSIONS
RT and HIIT serve as one of the most effective strategies for therapeutically treating patients with metabolic syndrome.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
IRCT, IRCT20221120056548N1. Registered 23 November 2022 - Retrospectively registered.
Topics: Humans; Female; Metabolic Syndrome; Resistance Training; Sirtuin 1; Glycated Hemoglobin; High-Intensity Interval Training; Postmenopause; Cholesterol
PubMed: 37858156
DOI: 10.1186/s12944-023-01940-x -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Sep 2023Neural adaptations to resistance training (RT) and their correlation with muscle strength remain partially understood. We conducted a systematic review and multivariate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Neural adaptations to resistance training (RT) and their correlation with muscle strength remain partially understood. We conducted a systematic review and multivariate meta-analysis to examine the effects of metronome-paced (MP), self-paced (SP), and isometric (IM) training on M1 and corticospinal pathway activity. Following MP RT, a significant increase in corticospinal excitability was observed, correlating with increased strength. Conversely, no significant relationship was found after SP or IM training. RT also reduced the duration of the cortical silent period, but this change did not predict strength changes and was not specific to any training modality. No significant effects were found for short-interval intracortical inhibition. Our findings suggest that changes in corticospinal excitability may contribute to strength gains after RT. Furthermore, the relationship between these adaptations and strength appears dependent on the type of training performed.
Topics: Humans; Resistance Training; Pyramidal Tracts; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Motor Cortex; Muscle Strength; Evoked Potentials, Motor; Muscle, Skeletal
PubMed: 37353049
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105289 -
Journal of Physiotherapy Jul 2023What is the effect of high-velocity power training (HVPT) compared with traditional resistance training (TRT) on functional performance in older adults? What is the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
QUESTIONS
What is the effect of high-velocity power training (HVPT) compared with traditional resistance training (TRT) on functional performance in older adults? What is the quality of intervention reporting for the relevant literature?
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
PARTICIPANTS
Older adults (aged > 60 years), regardless of health status, baseline functional capacity or residential status.
INTERVENTIONS
High-velocity power training with the intent to perform the concentric phase as quickly as possible compared with traditional moderate-velocity resistance training performed with a concentric phase of ≥ 2 seconds.
OUTCOME MEASURES
Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), five times sit-to-stand test (5-STS), 30-second sit-to-stand test (30-STS), gait speed tests, static or dynamic balance tests, stair climb tests and walking tests for distance. The quality of intervention reporting was assessed with the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) score.
RESULTS
Nineteen trials with 1,055 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with TRT, HVPT had a weak-to-moderate effect on change from baseline scores for the SPPB (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.53; low-quality evidence) and TUG (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63; low-quality evidence). The effect of HVPT relative to TRT for other outcomes remained very uncertain. The average CERT score across all trials was 53%, with two trials rated high quality and four rated moderate quality.
CONCLUSION
HVPT had similar effects to TRT for functional performance in older adults, but there is considerable uncertainty in most estimates. HVPT had better effects on the SPPB and TUG, but it is unclear whether the benefit is large enough to be clinically worthwhile.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Exercise; Physical Functional Performance; Postural Balance; Resistance Training; Time and Motion Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37328359
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2023.05.018 -
Scientific Reports Sep 2023The current study is of the quasi-experimental type, with a pre-and post-test design, and subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: control (n = 8) and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
The current study is of the quasi-experimental type, with a pre-and post-test design, and subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: control (n = 8) and experimental (test) (n = 8). Based on the patient's self-report and using daily diet control tables, the patient's diet planning percentage of energy supply was managed and controlled for 3 days. The protocol for functional resistance training for these circular exercises, including the squat, lunge, bear crawl, rock press, jumping jack, and back fly lunge, was performed three times per week without specialized apparatus. Ejection fraction (EF) and fractional shortening (FS) were measured before and after functional resistance training, using echocardiography. Liver Stiffness and steatosis were measured using FibroScan, and the liver function was determined using biochemical assays. The average age of patients in the control group and the test group were 46.02 ± 5.4 and 48.6 ± 2.51, respectively. Pre-test and post-test of the body mass index were 32.06 ± 5.06 and 30.02 ± 3.97, and for the body fat percentage were 33.65 ± 6.09 and 25.41 ± 4.99. In non-alcoholic fatty liver patients, due to functional resistance training, EF (p-value = 0.003) and FS (p-value = 0.03) significantly increased, and C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP) (p-value = 0.001), steatosis (p-value = 0.04), and stiffness (p-value = 0.01) decreased. According to the results and without considering clinical trials, functional resistance training affects the structure and function of the heart and Liver in NAFLD patients.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Resistance Training; Heart; Echocardiography; C-Reactive Protein; Ursidae
PubMed: 37726373
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-42687-w -
Experimental Gerontology Jul 2023Strength training is widely recommended to improve strength, muscle mass and power. However, the feasibility and potential efficacy of strength training using lighter... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparison of traditional vs. lighter load strength training on fat-free mass, strength, power and affective responses in middle and older-aged adults: A pilot randomized trial.
OBJECTIVES
Strength training is widely recommended to improve strength, muscle mass and power. However, the feasibility and potential efficacy of strength training using lighter loads near failure on these outcomes in middle and older-aged adults remains unclear.
METHODS
23 community-living adults were randomized into two groups: Traditional strength training (ST) (8-12 repetitions) or a lighter load, higher repetitions (LLHR) (20-24 repetitions) group. Participants performed a full-body workout (twice a week) with 8 exercises at a perceived exertion of 7-8 (0-10 scale) for 10 weeks. Post-testing was performed by an assessor blinded to group assignments. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to examine between group differences using baseline values as a covariate.
RESULTS
The study involved individuals with a mean age of 59 years, of which 61 % were women. The LLHR group demonstrated a high attendance rate of 92 % (9.5 %) and reported leg press exercise RPE of 7.1 (0.53), along with a session feeling scale of 2.0 (1.7). There was a trivial difference in fat free mass (FFM) favoring LLHR vs ST [0.27 kg 95 % CI (-0.87, 1.42)]. The ST group exhibited superior increases in leg press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) strength [-14 kg (-23, -5)], while the LLHR group showed greater strength endurance increases (65 % 1RM) [8 repetitions (2, 14)]. Leg press power [41 W (-42, 124)] and exercise efficacy [-3.8 (-21.2, 13.5)] demonstrated trivial between-group differences.
CONCLUSION
A pragmatic, full-body strength training program with lighter loads taken close to failure appears to be a viable option for promoting muscular adaptations in middle- and older-aged adults. These results are exploratory and require a larger trial for confirmation.
Topics: Humans; Female; Adult; Middle Aged; Male; Resistance Training; Pilot Projects; Exercise; Weight Lifting; Correlation of Data; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal
PubMed: 37236327
DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2023.112219 -
Journal of the International Society of... Dec 2023Exercise and diet have positive effects on hepatic fat reduction, and protein supplementation is known to lower hepatic fat accumulation. However, the effect of a... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Exercise and diet have positive effects on hepatic fat reduction, and protein supplementation is known to lower hepatic fat accumulation. However, the effect of a combination of exercise and whey protein supplementation (WPS) on hepatic fat content (HFC) is unknown.
METHODS
We investigated the effect of WPS on HFC during resistance exercise and diet control intervention for four weeks. A total of 34 sedentary males participated and were randomly assigned to two groups: a protein supplement group (PSG, = 18) and a control group (CG, = 16). The PSG took 60 g of WPS per day, and the CG took 60 g of an isocaloric placebo per day. All participants were fed a calorie-controlled diet throughout the study period, with their daily caloric intake determined by their resting metabolic rate and physical activity level. Both groups performed resistance exercises supervised by experts at 60-70% of their maximum efforts for 60 min/day, 6 days/week for 4 weeks. HFC was assessed using the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) after an 8 h fast, at pre-, mid-, and post-intervention. Liver enzymes and lipid profile were also analyzed after an 8 h fast and pre- and post-intervention.
RESULTS
The CAP was significantly reduced after 4 weeks of intervention in both groups (PSG, < .001; CG, = .002). However, there was no significant interaction between the group and changes in CAP. Interestingly, when comparing the pre- and mid-tests, both groups also had significantly reduced CAP (PSG, = .027; CG, = .028), but there was a significant difference in the amount of change in CAP between the two groups (PSG, -47.2 ± 25.4 dB/m; CG, -19.5 ± 15.1 dB/m; = .042). For liver enzymes, there was a significant interaction between the two groups and a change in aspartate transaminase (AST) ( = .038). However, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels were significantly decreased only in the PSG group ( = .002). In lipids, both groups showed significantly decreased total cholesterol ( < .001) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( < .001) after the intervention.
CONCLUSION
Our data showed that WPS may not enhance the overall effects of resistance exercise on HFC and lipid profiles. However, in part, WPS may have a beneficial effect on liver enzymatic changes and rapid response to resistance exercise-induced HFC reduction.
Topics: Male; Humans; Whey Proteins; Resistance Training; Liver; Dietary Supplements; Exercise; Cholesterol, LDL
PubMed: 37245070
DOI: 10.1080/15502783.2023.2217783 -
BMJ Open Oct 2023Patellofemoral pain (PFP) syndrome is a common knee joint functional disorder. Blood flow restriction (BFR) training has shown promise in improving PFP; however, the...
Comparing the effect of intermittent blood flow restriction training and high-load resistance training in patients with patellofemoral pain: study protocol for a randomised trial.
BACKGROUND
Patellofemoral pain (PFP) syndrome is a common knee joint functional disorder. Blood flow restriction (BFR) training has shown promise in improving PFP; however, the effectiveness of intermittent BFR (iBFR) training remains uncertain. This study aims to compare the rehabilitative effects of iBFR combined with low-load resistance training and high-load resistance training in PFP patients and to assess the effectiveness of iBFR combined with low-load resistance training for improving PFP.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
This randomised, patient-assessor blinded, controlled trial will include 42 eligible PFP patients randomly allocated to an intervention group (iBFR combined with low-load resistance training) or a control group (high-load resistance training) in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will receive interventions three times per week for 8 weeks and will be followed up for 24 weeks. The primary outcome measure is pain, and the secondary outcomes include self-reported function, quality of life, muscle strength and muscle thickness. Assessments will be conducted at baseline, 8 weeks and 24 weeks during follow-up. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed.Collectively, we expect that the findings of this randomised clinical trial will contribute to understanding the potential benefits of iBFR training and provide insightful guidance for developing more effective treatment strategies for patients with PFP.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
This study was approved by the Sports Science Experiment Ethics Committee of Beijing Sport University (2022274H). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Trial results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300068281).
Topics: Humans; Resistance Training; Blood Flow Restriction Therapy; Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome; Quality of Life; Pain; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37865415
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073188 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Oct 2023Fibromyalgia guidelines indicate that exercise is critical in the management of fibromyalgia, and there is evidence that patients with fibromyalgia can perform...
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia guidelines indicate that exercise is critical in the management of fibromyalgia, and there is evidence that patients with fibromyalgia can perform resistance training at moderate and high intensities. However, despite the biological plausibility that progression of intensity provides greater benefit to individuals, no studies have compared different intensities (progressive versus constant intensities) of the same exercise in this population.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effect of 24 sessions of resistance training (progressive vs. constant intensity) on impact of fibromyalgia, sleep quality, anxiety, depression, pain, walking ability, and musculoskeletal capacity.
METHODS
A protocol for a blinded randomized controlled trial. The sample will be randomized into three groups: group 1 (progressive intensity, experimental), group 2 (constant intensity, control A), and group 3 (walking, control B). Group 1 will perform resistance training at moderate intensity (50% of maximum dynamic strength), previously determined by the 1 repetition maximum (1-RM) test in the proposed exercises. The strength of each individual will be reassessed every 4 weeks (by 1-RM) and the intensity of each exercise will be positively adjusted by 20% of the value observed in kg (i.e., first month 50%; second month 70%; third month 90% of the maximum dynamic strength). Group 2 will perform the same procedure, but the intensity will be maintained at 50% of the maximum dynamic strength throughout the treatment (i.e., constant intensity from the first to the third month). Group 3 will perform a 40-minute treadmill walk at low intensity, defined by a walking speed corresponding to 60-70% of the maximum heart rate, which we will control with a heart rate monitor. All groups will receive a 45-minute pain education session prior to the exercise program, covering the pathophysiologic mechanisms of chronic pain, strategies for coping with pain, avoiding hypervigilance, and deconstructing beliefs and myths about chronic pain.
DISCUSSION
The results of the present study may help health care professionals adjust the intensity of resistance training and thus plan the most effective intervention (progressive or constant intensity) to reduce the impact of fibromyalgia on patients' lives.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) ID: RBR-9pbq9fg, date of registration: October 06, 2022.
Topics: Humans; Fibromyalgia; Resistance Training; Chronic Pain; Quality of Life; Exercise Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37838712
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06952-3