Back

Effectiveness of iso-inertial resistance training on eccentric and concentric power, physical performance, and risk of falls in physically active middle-older adults: a randomised controlled trial

Cadellans-Arroniz, A.; Blanco, D.; Madruga-Perera, M.; Zarate-Lozano, V.; Dantony, F.; Romero-Rodriguez, D.

2024-05-13 sports medicine
10.1101/2024.05.13.24307107 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of iso-inertial resistance training on eccentric power compared to gravitational training in physically active middle-older adults. MethodsParallel-group, randomised controlled trial at Espai Esport Wellness Center (Granollers, Spain). Forty-four physically active adults (>57 years of age) were randomised to iso-inertial (n=21) or gravitational (n=23) training groups (R software; 1:1 ratio). Participants had to complete a 6-week training program (2 sessions/week) consisting of three exercises (forward lunge, side lunge, forward lunge with row). Primary outcome: power in the eccentric phase of each exercise evaluated with both iso-inertial and gravitational devices. Secondary outcomes: concentric power, physical performance, risk of falls. Only outcome evaluators were blinded. We used multivariate linear regression models to analyse the effect of interventions. ResultsIso-inertial training showed better eccentric power gains than gravitational training for iso-inertial system evaluation, although the difference was only statistically significant for the side lunge. Forward lunge: between-group difference 3.99 W (95% CI: -3.99 to 11.33, p: 0.28); side lunge: difference 8.50 W (95% CI: 2.13 to 14.87; p: 0.01); forward lunge with row: difference 14.07 W (95% CI: -2.07 -to 30.20, p: 0.09). We observed no differences for the gravitational system evaluation nor for concentric power, physical performance, and risk of falls. The two groups improved remarkably from baseline for all outcomes. ConclusionsIso-inertial resistance training might lead to better eccentric power gains than gravitational training. Both approaches seem equally effective in improving concentric power and physical performance, and reducing the risk of falls. Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06160089). O_TEXTBOXWHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC- Physical exercise in middle-older adults is an effective strategy to promote health and improve quality of life. - Resistance training using iso-inertial devices generates an advantage in hypertrophy, electromyographic activity or balance compared to cable-resistance training in middle-older adults. - The power at which an action is performed is considered a predictor of functional capacity, as it is associated with the execution of activities of daily living such as climbing stairs, getting up from a chair or walking. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS- The iso-inertial training system improves muscle power in the eccentric phase compared to the gravitational system, although the difference is only statistically significant for the side lunge exercise. - Iso-inertial and gravitational resistance training are equally effective in improving concentric power, and physical performance and reducing the risk of falls. - Using iso-inertial devices is recommended to evaluate power in the eccentric phase, as they may capture better the eccentric demands than gravitational devices. HOW THIS STUDY MIGHT AFFECT RESEARCH, PRACTICE OR POLICY- Using iso-inertial devices for resistance training in middle-older adults seems a promising way to improve the power in the eccentric phase of an action. - Improving eccentric power in older adults is crucial due to its transfer to daily life activities. - Regardless of the training system, clinicians should prescribe resistance training programs to middle-older adults as these programs remarkably increase power and physical performance and reduce the risk of falls. C_TEXTBOX

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Experimental Gerontology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.4%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 13%
14.4%
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 1%
14.4%
4
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.4%
5
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMC Nephrology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.1%
7
Nutrients
64 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.1%
8
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.9%
9
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.9%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.5%
11
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
12
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
13
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
14
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
15
BMC Geriatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
16
International Journal of Public Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
17
Aging Cell
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
18
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
19
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
20
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
21
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
22
European Journal of Epidemiology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
23
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
24
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
25
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
26
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology
34 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%