@misc{MayerScharhagRosenbergerCarlsohnetal.2011,
  author    = {Mayer, Frank and Scharhag-Rosenberger, Friederike and Carlsohn, Anja and Cassel, Michael and M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Scharhag, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {The intensity and effects of strength training in the elderly},
  series = {Deutsches {\"A}rzteblatt international : a weekly online journal of clinical medicine and public health},
  volume    = {108},
  journal   = {Deutsches {\"A}rzteblatt international : a weekly online journal of clinical medicine and public health},
  number    = {21},
  publisher = {Dt. {\"A}rzte-Verl.},
  address   = {Cologne},
  issn      = {1866-0452},
  doi       = {10.3238/arztebl.2011.0359},
  pages     = {359 -- U30},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Background: The elderly need strength training more and more as they grow older to stay mobile for their everyday activities. The goal of training is to reduce the loss of muscle mass and the resulting loss of motor function. The dose-response relationship of training intensity to training effect has not yet been fully elucidated. Methods: PubMed was selectively searched for articles that appeared in the past 5 years about the effects and dose-response relationship of strength training in the elderly. Results: Strength training in the elderly (> 60 years) increases muscle strength by increasing muscle mass, and by improving the recruitment of motor units, and increasing their firing rate. Muscle mass can be increased through training at an intensity corresponding to 60\% to 85\% of the individual maximum voluntary strength. Improving the rate of force development requires training at a higher intensity (above 85\%), in the elderly just as in younger persons. It is now recommended that healthy old people should train 3 or 4 times weekly for the best results; persons with poor performance at the outset can achieve improvement even with less frequent training. Side effects are rare. Conclusion: Progressive strength training in the elderly is efficient, even with higher intensities, to reduce sarcopenia, and to retain motor function.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MayerBonaventuraCasseletal.2012,
  author    = {Mayer, Frank and Bonaventura, Klaus and Cassel, Michael and M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Weber, Josefine and Scharhag-Rosenberger, Friederike and Carlsohn, Anja and Baur, Heiner and Scharhag, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Medical results of preparticipation examination in adolescent athletes},
  series = {British journal of sports medicine : the journal of sport and exercise medicine},
  volume    = {46},
  journal   = {British journal of sports medicine : the journal of sport and exercise medicine},
  number    = {7},
  publisher = {BMJ Publ. Group},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0306-3674},
  doi       = {10.1136/bjsports-2011-090966},
  pages     = {524 -- 530},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Background Preparticipation examinations (PPE) are frequently used to evaluate eligibility for competitive sports in adolescent athletes. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these examinations is under debate since costs are high and its validity is discussed controversial. Purpose To analyse medical findings and consequences in adolescent athletes prior to admission to a sports school. Methods In 733 adolescent athletes (318 girls, 415 boys, age 12.3+/-0.4, 16 sports disciplines), history and clinical examination (musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, general medicine) was performed to evaluate eligibility. PPE was completed by determination of blood parameters, ECG at rest and during ergometry, echocardiography and x-rays and ultrasonography if indicated. Eligibility was either approved or rated with restriction. Recommendations for therapy and/or prevention were given to the athletes and their parents. Results Historical (h) and clinical (c) findings (eg, pain, verified pathologies) were more frequent regarding the musculoskeletal system (h: 120, 16.4\%; c: 247, 33.7\%) compared to cardiovascular (h: 9, 1.2\%; c: 23, 3.1\%) or general medicine findings (h: 116, 15.8\%; c: 71, 9.7\%). ECG at rest was moderately abnormal in 46 (6.3\%) and severely abnormal in 25 athletes (3.4\%). Exercise ECG was suspicious in 25 athletes (3.4\%). Relevant echocardiographic abnormalities were found in 17 athletes (2.3\%). In 52 of 358 cases (14.5\%), x-rays led to diagnosis (eg, Spondylolisthesis). Eligibility was temporarily restricted in 41 athletes (5.6\%). Three athletes (0.4\%) had to be excluded from competitive sports. Therapy (eg, physiotherapy, medication) and/or prevention (sensorimotor training, vaccination) recommendations were deduced due to musculoskeletal (t:n = 76,10.3\%; p:n = 71,9.8\%) and general medicine findings (t:n = 80, 10.9\%; p:n = 104, 14.1\%). Conclusion Eligibility for competitive sports is restricted in only 5.5\% of adolescent athletes at age 12. Eligibility refusals are rare. However, recommendations for therapy and prevention are frequent, mainly regarding the musculoskeletal system. In spite of time and cost consumption, adolescent preparticipation before entering a career in high-performance sports is supported.},
  language  = {en}
}