"It's not time for us to sit down yet": how group exercise programs can motivate physical activity and overcome barriers in inactive older adults.

PURPOSE: Physical activity and exercise are critical for older adults' physical and mental health. The purpose of this qualitative study was to richly capture the motivators of and barriers to engaging in physical activity in previously inactive older adults who participated in a three-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) of eight-week group exercise interventions. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative content analysis of individual interviews with fifteen participants-five from each study arm: strength training, walking, and inactive control. Participants included nine females and six males ranging from 60 to 86 years of age. RESULTS: Key motivators of physical activity included perceived improvements in physical and mental health, positive social influences, observed health deterioration in others, and the desire to spend time with and take care of family members. Barriers to physical activity included existing health conditions, fear of getting hurt, negative social influences, perceived lack of time and motivation, inconvenient times and locations, and monetary cost. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings add to the body of literature identifying factors that motivate and stand in the way of older adults' engagement in physical activity. These factors influence older adults' self-efficacy and should be incorporated into the design of new and existing programs to encourage initiation and maintenance of physical activity.

Older adults who resistance train improve physical function and adopt long-term exercise habits despite COVID-19 restrictions.

Exercise interventions targeting older adults often focus on acute changes, but lasting improvements require the adoption of long-term, independent exercise habits. This study aimed to assess the influence of eight-weeks of resistance training (SSSH) on clinically relevant fall-risk indicators in older adults and to evaluate if SSSH participation altered independent exercise engagement 12 months later. Sixty adults aged 50 yrs+ were randomised into SSSH, Walk, or Control groups and completed questionnaires and muscle strength and flexibility tests pre/post 8 weeks. SSSH and Walk met 2x/wk for 60 min. Twelve months later 24 participants also completed a follow-up survey amid COVID-19 restrictions. Eight-week group changes were analysed using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc analyses, and survey responses were compared using paired t-tests with a Bonferroni correction. SSSH demonstrated greater absolute changes over 8 weeks in sleep quality, activity engagement, 30-second-sit-to-stand and upper-body flexibility than Walk or Controls (p < 0.05). Twelve months later, SSSH participants reported significantly increasing independent resistance (+68), aerobic (+125) and flexibility (+26) training minutes per week (all p < 0.01). In conclusion, SSSH reduced fall risk in 8 weeks and sparked older adults to begin and sustain positive exercise habits 12 months later, despite COVID-19 restrictions.

Acute Resistance Training May Have Lasting Benefit to Middle-Aged Adults.

Age-related declines in physical function can be mitigated with resistance training (RT), but most adults do not regularly exercise. We aimed to identify the magnitude and duration of benefits after RT in the Stay Strong, Stay Healthy (SSSH) program. A total of 27 adults (Repeaters n = 15; Summer Only n = 12), aged 60.7 ± 4.8 years, completed the same 8 weeks of SSSH in the summer and Repeaters continued in fall and spring months. Independent and paired t-tests and repeated-measures ANOVAs were used to test changes in survey responses and physical performance over 10 months. Both groups were similar at baseline (p > .07) and improved from pre- to post-summer for health surveys scores, 30 second-sit-to-stand, timed-up-and-go, and sit-n-reach (p ≤ .02). Additionally, Repeaters (measured data) and Summer Only (2.3% modeled decline) maintained those improvements 10 months later. Participation in 8 weeks of SSSH significantly improved physical strength and function and these improvements may last up to a year.

Resistance Training Reduces Age- and Geography-Related Physical Function Discrepancies in Older Adults.

Comorbidities affecting physical function increase with advanced-age and rural living. This study investigated the degree of benefit from resistance training (RT) in older adults based on age (50-89 years), location (urban vs. rural), and program duration (10 vs. 8-weeks). 260 participants completed pre- and post-program dynamic and static tasks and flexibility testing. Paired and independent t-tests and one-way and repeated measures ANOVAs were used to test group improvements. All ages improved performance (all p ≤ .002) but those in their 50's improved flexibility the most and those in their 60's improved 30STS more and tandem balance less than those in their 80's. Both rural and urban participants improved in all areas (all p ≤ .002), but rural participants reported greater improvements in tandem balance. Both 10- and 8-week classes improved performance (all p ≤ .001), but 8-week participants improved dynamic tasks and tandem balance more. RT can reduce functional discrepancies in older adults and rural residents.

Efficacy of an 8-Week Resistance Training Program in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Older adults are challenged with aging-related declines in skeletal muscle mass and function. Although exercise interventions of longer duration typically yield larger changes, shorter-term interventions may kick-start positive effects, allowing participants to begin engaging in more activity. This study aimed to determine whether 8 weeks of a resistance training program (Stay Strong, Stay Healthy [SSSH]) improved dynamic muscle strength, balance, flexibility, and sleep. Inactive adults aged ≥60 years were randomized into SSSH (n = 15), walking (WALK; n = 17), or control (CON; n = 14) groups. The SSSH and WALK groups met 2 times per week for 60 min. The participants completed pre/post general health, activity, and sleep questionnaires; DXA scans; and functional tasks. One-way repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance was used to determine interactions and decomposed using repeated-measures analysis of variance. SSSH improved sit-to-stand performance, back scratch distance, and sleep quality and reported more auxiliary physical activity than WALK or CON (p < .05). Resistance training interventions in sedentary older adults can improve physical function and encourage additional activity in 8 weeks.

Effectiveness of Advanced Stay Strong, Stay Healthy in Community Settings.

The goal of this research was to investigate the effectiveness of the 10-week, University of Missouri (MU) Extension strength training program Advanced Stay Strong, Stay Healthy (ASSSH). It was hypothesized that the program can improve strength, balance, agility, and flexibility-all physical measures of falling among seniors. Matched pair t tests were used to compare differences in five physical measures of health, body composition, and percent body fat (%BF). Two-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the age effects on changes in physical health from the start and finish of the exercise program. Following programming, participants significantly improved strength, flexibility, and balance, and significantly reduced %BF (p < .05). Our data indicate that ASSSH can improve the physical health of senior citizens and can successfully be translated into community practice by MU Extension professionals.

Comparison of the Bod Pod and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry in men.

The majority of studies investigating the accuracy of the Bod Pod have compared it to hydrostatic weighing (HW), the long held, and perhaps outdated 'gold standard' method of body composition analysis. Much less research has compared the Bod Pod to dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), a technique that is becoming popular as an alternative reference method. The purpose of this study was to compare per cent fat estimates by the Bod Pod to those of DXA in a large number of men. Participants were 160 men (32 +/- 11 years). Per cent body fat was estimated to be 19.4 +/- 6.8 and 21.6 +/- 8.4 for DXA and the Bod Pod, respectively. Although the two methods were highly correlated (0.94), the mean difference of 2.2% was significant (p < 0.01). The amount of difference increased as body fatness increased (p < 0.0001). The results of this study indicate that a difference between methods existed for our sample of men. It is uncertain exactly where the difference lies. Practitioners should be aware that even with the use of technologically sophisticated methods (i.e., Bod Pod, DXA), differences between methods exist and the determination of body composition is at best, an estimation.

A meta-analysis to determine the dose response for strength development.

PURPOSE: The identification of a quantifiable dose-response relationship for strength training is important to the prescription of proper training programs. Although much research has been performed examining strength increases with training, taken individually, they provide little insight into the magnitude of strength gains along the continuum of training intensities, frequencies, and volumes. A meta-analysis of 140 studies with a total of 1433 effect sizes (ES) was carried out to identify the dose-response relationship. METHODS: Studies employing a strength-training intervention and containing data necessary to calculate ES were included in the analysis. RESULTS: ES demonstrated different responses based on the training status of the participants. Training with a mean intensity of 60% of one repetition maximum elicits maximal gains in untrained individuals, whereas 80% is most effective in those who are trained. Untrained participants experience maximal gains by training each muscle group 3 d.wk and trained individuals 2 d.wk. Four sets per muscle group elicited maximal gains in both trained and untrained individuals. CONCLUSION: The dose-response trends identified in this analysis support the theory of progression in resistance program design and can be useful in the development of training programs designed to optimize the effort to benefit ratio.

A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for local muscular endurance.

The purpose of this study was to compare linear periodization (LP), daily undulating periodization (DUP), and reverse linear periodization (RLP) for gains in local muscular endurance and strength. Sixty subjects (30 men, 30 women) were randomly assigned to LP, DUP, or RLP groups. Maximal repetitions at 50% of the subject's body weight were recorded for leg extensions as a pretest, midtest, and posttest. Training involved 3 sets (leg extensions) 2 days per week. The LP group performed sets of 25 repetition maximum (RM), 20RM, and 15RM changing every 5 weeks. The RLP group progressed in reverse order (15RM, 20RM, 25RM), changing every 5 weeks. The DUP group adjusted training variables between each workout (25RM, 20RM, 15RM repeated for the 15 weeks). Volume and intensity were equated for each training program. No significant differences were measured in endurance gains between groups (RLP = 73%, LP = 56%, DUP = 55%; p = 0.58). But effect sizes (ES) demonstrated that the RLP treatment (ES = 0.27) was more effective than the LP treatment (control) and the DUP treatment (ES = -0.02) at increasing muscular endurance. Therefore, it was concluded that making gradual increases in volume and gradual decreases in intensity was the most effective program for increasing muscular endurance.

Three sets of weight training superior to 1 set with equal intensity for eliciting strength.

The purpose of this study was to compare single and multiple sets of weight training for strength gains in recreationally trained individuals. Sixteen men (age = 21 +/- 2.0) were randomly assigned to 1 set (S-1; n = 8) or 3 set (S-3; n = 8) groups and trained 3 days per week for 12 weeks. One repetition maximum (1RM) was recorded for bench press and leg press at pre-, mid-, and posttest. Subjects trained according to daily undulating periodization (DUP), involving the bench press and leg press exercises between 4RM and 8RM. Training intensity was equated for both groups. Analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed statistically significant differences favoring S-3 in the leg press (p < 0.05, effect size [ES] = 6.5) and differences approaching significance in the bench press (p = 0.07, ES = 2.3). The results demonstrate that for recreationally trained individuals using DUP training, 3 sets of training are superior to 1 set for eliciting maximal strength gains.

A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for strength.

The purpose of this study was to compare linear periodization (LP) and daily undulating periodization (DUP) for strength gains. Twenty men (age = 21 +/- 2.3 years) were randomly assigned to LP (n = 10) or DUP (n = 10) groups. One repetition maximum (1RM) was recorded for bench press and leg press as a pre-, mid-, and posttest. Training involved 3 sets (bench press and leg press), 3 days per week. The LP group performed sets of 8 RM during weeks 1-4, 6 RM during weeks 4-8, and 4 RM during weeks 9-12. The DUP group altered training on a daily basis (Monday, 8 RM; Wednesday, 6 RM; Friday, 4 RM). Analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed statistically significant differences favoring the DUP group between T1 to T2 and T1 to T3. Making program alterations on a daily basis was more effective in eliciting strength gains than doing so every 4 weeks.