Refine
Year of publication
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (19)
Keywords
- resistance training (19) (remove)
Numerous national associations and multiple reviews have documented the safety and efficacy of strength training for children and adolescents. The literature highlights the significant training-induced increases in strength associated with youth strength training. However, the effectiveness of youth strength training programs to improve power measures is not as clear. This discrepancy may be related to training and testing specificity. Most prior youth strength training programs emphasized lower intensity resistance with relatively slow movements. Since power activities typically involve higher intensity, explosive-like contractions with higher angular velocities (e.g., plyometrics), there is a conflict between the training medium and testing measures. This meta-analysis compared strength (e.g., training with resistance or body mass) and power training programs (e.g., plyometric training) on proxies of muscle strength, power, and speed. A systematic literature search using a Boolean Search Strategy was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, SPORT Discus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar and revealed 652 hits. After perusal of title, abstract, and full text, 107 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed small to moderate magnitude changes for training specificity with jump measures. In other words, power training was more effective than strength training for improving youth jump height. For sprint measures, strength training was more effective than power training with youth. Furthermore, strength training exhibited consistently large magnitude changes to lower body strength measures, which contrasted with the generally trivial, small and moderate magnitude training improvements of power training upon lower body strength, sprint and jump measures, respectively. Maturity related inadequacies in eccentric strength and balance might influence the lack of training specificity with the unilateral landings and propulsions associated with sprinting. Based on this meta-analysis, strength training should be incorporated prior to power training in order to establish an adequate foundation of strength for power training activities.
Cross-education has been extensively investigated with adults. Adult studies report asymmetrical cross-education adaptations predominately after dominant limb training. The objective of the study was to examine unilateral leg press (LP) training of the dominant or nondominant leg on contralateral and ipsilateral strength and balance measures. Forty-two youth (10-13 years) were placed (random allocation) into a dominant (n = 15) or nondominant (n = 14) leg press training group or nontraining control (n = 13). Experimental groups trained 3 times per week for 8 weeks and were tested pre-/post-training for ipsilateral and contralateral 1-repetition maximum (RM) horizontal LP, maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of knee extensors (KE) and flexors (KF), countermovement jump (CMJ), triple hop test (THT), MVIC strength of elbow flexors (EF) and handgrip, as well as the stork and Y balance tests. Both dominant and nondominant LP training significantly (p < 0.05) increased both ipsilateral and contralateral lower body strength (LP 1RM (dominant: 59.6%-81.8%; nondominant: 59.5%-96.3%), KE MVIC (dominant: 12.4%-18.3%; nondominant: 8.6%-18.6%), KF MVIC (dominant: 7.9%-22.3%; nondominant: nonsignificant-3.8%), and power (CMJ: dominant: 11.1%-18.1%; nondominant: 7.7%-16.6%)). The exception was that nondominant LP training demonstrated a nonsignificant change with the contralateral KF MVIC. Other significant improvements were with nondominant LP training on ipsilateral EF 1RM (6.2%) and THT (9.6%). There were no significant changes with EF and handgrip MVIC. The contralateral leg stork balance test was impaired following dominant LP training. KF MVIC exhibited the only significant relative post-training to pretraining (post-test/pre-test) ratio differences between dominant versus nondominant LP cross-education training effects. In conclusion, children exhibit symmetrical cross-education or global training adaptations with unilateral training of dominant or nondominant upper leg.
The prevalence of obesity in the pediatric population has become a major public health issue. Indeed, the dramatic increase of this epidemic causes multiple and harmful consequences, Physical activity, particularly physical exercise, remains to be the cornerstone of interventions against childhood obesity. Given the conflicting findings with reference to the relevant literature addressing the effects of exercise on adiposity and physical fitness outcomes in obese children and adolescents, the effect of duration-matched concurrent training (CT) [50% resistance (RT) and 50% high-intensity-interval-training (HIIT)] on body composition and physical fitness in obese youth remains to be elucidated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 9-weeks of CT compared to RT or HIIT alone, on body composition and selected physical fitness components in healthy sedentary obese youth. Out of 73 participants, only 37; [14 males and 23 females; age 13.4 ± 0.9 years; body-mass-index (BMI): 31.2 ± 4.8 kg·m-2] were eligible and randomized into three groups: HIIT (n = 12): 3-4 sets×12 runs at 80–110% peak velocity, with 10-s passive recovery between bouts; RT (n = 12): 6 exercises; 3–4 sets × 10 repetition maximum (RM) and CT (n = 13): 50% serial completion of RT and HIIT. CT promoted significant greater gains compared to HIIT and RT on body composition (p < 0.01, d = large), 6-min-walking test distance (6 MWT-distance) and on 6 MWT-VO2max (p < 0.03, d = large). In addition, CT showed substantially greater improvements than HIIT in the medicine ball throw test (20.2 vs. 13.6%, p < 0.04, d = large). On the other hand, RT exhibited significantly greater gains in relative hand grip strength (p < 0.03, d = large) and CMJ (p < 0.01, d = large) than HIIT and CT. CT promoted greater benefits for fat, body mass loss and cardiorespiratory fitness than HIIT or RT modalities. This study provides important information for practitioners and therapists on the application of effective exercise regimes with obese youth to induce significant and beneficial body composition changes. The applied CT program and the respective programming parameters in terms of exercise intensity and volume can be used by practitioners as an effective exercise treatment to fight the pandemic overweight and obesity in youth.
The prevalence of obesity in the pediatric population has become a major public health issue. Indeed, the dramatic increase of this epidemic causes multiple and harmful consequences, Physical activity, particularly physical exercise, remains to be the cornerstone of interventions against childhood obesity. Given the conflicting findings with reference to the relevant literature addressing the effects of exercise on adiposity and physical fitness outcomes in obese children and adolescents, the effect of duration-matched concurrent training (CT) [50% resistance (RT) and 50% high-intensity-interval-training (HIIT)] on body composition and physical fitness in obese youth remains to be elucidated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 9-weeks of CT compared to RT or HIIT alone, on body composition and selected physical fitness components in healthy sedentary obese youth. Out of 73 participants, only 37; [14 males and 23 females; age 13.4 ± 0.9 years; body-mass-index (BMI): 31.2 ± 4.8 kg·m-2] were eligible and randomized into three groups: HIIT (n = 12): 3-4 sets×12 runs at 80–110% peak velocity, with 10-s passive recovery between bouts; RT (n = 12): 6 exercises; 3–4 sets × 10 repetition maximum (RM) and CT (n = 13): 50% serial completion of RT and HIIT. CT promoted significant greater gains compared to HIIT and RT on body composition (p < 0.01, d = large), 6-min-walking test distance (6 MWT-distance) and on 6 MWT-VO2max (p < 0.03, d = large). In addition, CT showed substantially greater improvements than HIIT in the medicine ball throw test (20.2 vs. 13.6%, p < 0.04, d = large). On the other hand, RT exhibited significantly greater gains in relative hand grip strength (p < 0.03, d = large) and CMJ (p < 0.01, d = large) than HIIT and CT. CT promoted greater benefits for fat, body mass loss and cardiorespiratory fitness than HIIT or RT modalities. This study provides important information for practitioners and therapists on the application of effective exercise regimes with obese youth to induce significant and beneficial body composition changes. The applied CT program and the respective programming parameters in terms of exercise intensity and volume can be used by practitioners as an effective exercise treatment to fight the pandemic overweight and obesity in youth.
Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6-11 years, boys age 6-13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12-18 years, boys age 14-18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power-(e.g., jump height), endurance-(e.g., peak. VO2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.
Background: With increasing age neuromuscular deficits (e.g., sarcopenia) may result in impaired physical performance and an increased risk for falls. Prominent intrinsic fall-risk factors are age-related decreases in balance and strength / power performance as well as cognitive decline. Additional studies are needed to develop specifically tailored exercise programs for older adults that can easily be implemented into clinical practice. Thus, the objective of the present trial is to assess the effects of a fall prevention program that was developed by an interdisciplinary expert panel on measures of balance, strength / power, body composition, cognition, psychosocial well-being, and falls self-efficacy in healthy older adults. Additionally, the time-related effects of detraining are tested.
Methods/Design: Healthy old people (n = 54) between the age of 65 to 80 years will participate in this trial. The testing protocol comprises tests for the assessment of static / dynamic steady-state balance (i.e., Sharpened Romberg Test, instrumented gait analysis), proactive balance (i.e., Functional Reach Test; Timed Up and Go Test), reactive balance (i.e., perturbation test during bipedal stance; Push and Release Test), strength (i.e., hand grip strength test; Chair Stand Test), and power (i.e., Stair Climb Power Test; countermovement jump). Further, body composition will be analysed using a bioelectrical impedance analysis system. In addition, questionnaires for the assessment of psychosocial (i.e., World Health Organisation Quality of Life Assessment-Bref), cognitive (i.e., Mini Mental State Examination), and fall risk determinants (i.e., Fall Efficacy Scale -International) will be included in the study protocol. Participants will be randomized into two intervention groups or the control / waiting group. After baseline measures, participants in the intervention groups will conduct a 12-week balance and strength / power exercise intervention 3 times per week, with each training session lasting 30 min. (actual training time). One intervention group will complete an extensive supervised training program, while the other intervention group will complete a short version (` 3 times 3') that is home-based and controlled by weekly phone calls. Post-tests will be conducted right after the intervention period. Additionally, detraining effects will be measured 12 weeks after program cessation. The control group / waiting group will not participate in any specific intervention during the experimental period, but will receive the extensive supervised program after the experimental period.
Discussion: It is expected that particularly the supervised combination of balance and strength / power training will improve performance in variables of balance, strength / power, body composition, cognitive function, psychosocial well-being, and falls self-efficacy of older adults. In addition, information regarding fall risk assessment, dose-response-relations, detraining effects, and supervision of training will be provided. Further, training-induced health-relevant changes, such as improved performance in activities of daily living, cognitive function, and quality of life, as well as a reduced risk for falls may help to lower costs in the health care system. Finally, practitioners, therapists, and instructors will be provided with a scientifically evaluated feasible, safe, and easy-to-administer exercise program for fall prevention.
Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6–11 years, boys age 6–13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12–18 years, boys age 14–18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power—(e.g., jump height), endurance—(e.g., peak V°O2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.
Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6–11 years, boys age 6–13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12–18 years, boys age 14–18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power—(e.g., jump height), endurance—(e.g., peak V°O2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.
Background: Habitual walking speed predicts many clinical conditions later in life, but it declines with age. However, which particular exercise intervention can minimize the age-related gait speed loss is unclear.
Purpose: Our objective was to determine the effects of strength, power, coordination, and multimodal exercise training on healthy old adults' habitual and fast gait speed.
Methods: We performed a computerized systematic literature search in PubMed and Web of Knowledge from January 1984 up to December 2014. Search terms included 'Resistance training', 'power training', 'coordination training', 'multimodal training', and 'gait speed (outcome term). Inclusion criteria were articles available in full text, publication period over past 30 years, human species, journal articles, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, English as publication language, and subject age C65 years. The methodological quality of all eligible intervention studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. We computed weighted average standardized mean differences of the intervention-induced adaptations in gait speed using a random-effects model and tested for overall and individual intervention effects relative to no-exercise controls.
Results: A total of 42 studies (mean PEDro score of 5.0 +/- 1.2) were included in the analyses (2495 healthy old adults; age 74.2 years [64.4-82.7]; body mass 69.9 +/- 4.9 kg, height 1.64 +/- 0.05 m, body mass index 26.4 +/- 1.9 kg/m(2), and gait speed 1.22 +/- 0.18 m/s). The search identified only one power training study, therefore the subsequent analyses focused only on the effects of resistance, coordination, and multimodal training on gait speed. The three types of intervention improved gait speed in the three experimental groups combined (n = 1297) by 0.10 m/s (+/- 0.12) or 8.4 % (+/- 9.7), with a large effect size (ES) of 0.84. Resistance (24 studies; n = 613; 0.11 m/s; 9.3 %; ES: 0.84), coordination (eight studies, n = 198; 0.09 m/s; 7.6 %; ES: 0.76), and multimodal training (19 studies; n = 486; 0.09 m/s; 8.4 %, ES: 0.86) increased gait speed statistically and similarly.
Conclusions: Commonly used exercise interventions can functionally and clinically increase habitual and fast gait speed and help slow the loss of gait speed or delay its onset.
Background: Habitual walking speed predicts many clinical conditions later in life, but it declines with age. However, which particular exercise intervention can minimize the age-related gait speed loss is unclear.
Purpose: Our objective was to determine the effects of strength, power, coordination, and multimodal exercise training on healthy old adults' habitual and fast gait speed.
Methods: We performed a computerized systematic literature search in PubMed and Web of Knowledge from January 1984 up to December 2014. Search terms included 'Resistance training', 'power training', 'coordination training', 'multimodal training', and 'gait speed (outcome term). Inclusion criteria were articles available in full text, publication period over past 30 years, human species, journal articles, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, English as publication language, and subject age C65 years. The methodological quality of all eligible intervention studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. We computed weighted average standardized mean differences of the intervention-induced adaptations in gait speed using a random-effects model and tested for overall and individual intervention effects relative to no-exercise controls.
Results: A total of 42 studies (mean PEDro score of 5.0 +/- 1.2) were included in the analyses (2495 healthy old adults; age 74.2 years [64.4-82.7]; body mass 69.9 +/- 4.9 kg, height 1.64 +/- 0.05 m, body mass index 26.4 +/- 1.9 kg/m(2), and gait speed 1.22 +/- 0.18 m/s). The search identified only one power training study, therefore the subsequent analyses focused only on the effects of resistance, coordination, and multimodal training on gait speed. The three types of intervention improved gait speed in the three experimental groups combined (n = 1297) by 0.10 m/s (+/- 0.12) or 8.4 % (+/- 9.7), with a large effect size (ES) of 0.84. Resistance (24 studies; n = 613; 0.11 m/s; 9.3 %; ES: 0.84), coordination (eight studies, n = 198; 0.09 m/s; 7.6 %; ES: 0.76), and multimodal training (19 studies; n = 486; 0.09 m/s; 8.4 %, ES: 0.86) increased gait speed statistically and similarly.
Conclusions: Commonly used exercise interventions can functionally and clinically increase habitual and fast gait speed and help slow the loss of gait speed or delay its onset.