Cited by 20Nutrition and Health in AgingBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionSports Performance and Training

Longitudinal comparison of low- and high-velocity resistance training in relation to body composition and functional fitness of older adults.

Gray, Michelle, Powers, Melissa, Boyd, Larissa, Garver, Kayla·2018·Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

Abstract

Background Functional mobility disability affects more than one in five adults over 70 years and increases to 80% by 90 years. While negative changes in mobility are multifactorial, deleterious body composition changes contribute significantly. Resistance training alters the negative trajectory of physical function as well as increases lean mass among older adults. Recently, high-velocity (HV) resistance training has been indicated as an effective intervention to increase lean mass and functional performance.Aims The present investigation compared body composition, physical function, and muscular strength changes between HV and LV resistance training programs.Methods Participants > 65 years (n = 53) were randomly assigned to LV, HV, or active control (AC) group and participated in their respective intervention for 48 weeks.Results Analysis of covariance revealed no significant body composition changes over time between groups (p > 0.05). Eight-foot up-and-go performance improved in the HV and AC groups (p < 0.05) with no change in the LV group (p > 0.05) over time. Muscular strength increased in both the LV and HV groups within the first 24 weeks, while only in the LV group, muscular strength continued to increase from 24 to 48 weeks (p < 0.05).Discussion Resistance training appears to be an effective intervention for improving aspects of physical function and muscular strength; however, no significant changes in body composition were observed over the 48-week intervention.Conclusion Findings from the current investigation support use of resistance training for improving physical function among community-dwelling older adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40520-018-0929-6

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gray, M., Powers, M., Boyd, L., & Garver, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
  • University of Central Oklahoma (US)
  • University of Oklahoma Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Michelle
Venue
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
Published
2018-03-22
Volume
30
Issue
12
Pages
1465-1473
ISSN
  • 1594-0667 (ISSN-L)
  • 1720-8319
OpenAlex
W2792624187
Cited by
20
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aging Clinical and Experimental Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
Keywords
resistance training, older adults, body composition, functional fitness, muscle strength, physical function, mobility impairment, community-dwelling older adults, Timed Up and Go test
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Composition, Female, Humans, Male, Muscle Strength, Resistance Training

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review