Optimal Approach to Load Progressions during Strength Training in Older Adults.

Progressive resistance training (RT) is one of the most effective interventions for reducing age-related deficits in muscle mass and functional capacity. PURPOSE: To compare four approaches to load progressions in RT for older adults to determine if an optimal method exists. METHODS: Eighty-two healthy community-dwelling older adults (71.8 ± 6.2 yr) performed 11 wk of structured RT (2.5 d·wk) in treatment groups differing only by the method used to increase training loads. These included percent one repetition maximum (%1RM): standardized loads based on a percentage of the one repetition maximum (1RM); rating of perceived exertion (RPE): loads increased when perceived difficulty falls below 8/10 on the OMNI-Resistance Exercise Scale perceived exertion scale; repetition maximum (RM): loads increased when a target number of repetitions can be completed with a given load; repetitions in reserve (RiR): identical to RM except subjects must always maintain ≥1 "repetition in reserve," thus avoiding the possibility of training to temporary muscular failure. RESULTS: Multiple analyses of covariance indicated no significant between-group differences on any strength (chest press 1RM; leg press 1RM) or functional performance outcome (usual walking speed, maximum walking speed, 8-ft timed up-and-go, gallon jug transfer test, 30 s sit-to-stand). The RPE group found the exercise to be significantly more tolerable and enjoyable than subjects in the RiR, RM, and %1RM groups. CONCLUSION: Given the RM, RPE, %1RM, and RiR methods appear equally effective at improving muscular strength and functional performance in an older population, we conclude that the RPE method is optimal because it is likely to be perceived as the most tolerable and enjoyable, which are two important factors determining older adults' continued participation in RT.

Differences in Muscle Activation and Kinematics Between Cable-Based and Selectorized Weight Training.

Signorile, JF, Rendos, NK, Heredia Vargas, HH, Alipio, TC, Regis, RC, Eltoukhy, MM, Nargund, RS, and Romero, MA. Differences in muscle activation and kinematics between cable-based and selectorized weight training. J Strength Cond Res 31(2): 313-322, 2017-Cable resistance training machines are showing resurgent popularity and allow greater number of degrees of freedom than typical selectorized equipment. Given that specific kinetic chains are used during distinct activities of daily living (ADL), cable machines may provide more effective interventions for some ADL, whereas others may be best addressed using selectorized equipment. This study examined differences in activity levels (root mean square of the EMG [rmsEMG]) of 6 major muscles (pectoralis major, PM; anterior deltoid, AD; biceps brachii, BB; rectus abdominis, RA; external obliques, EO; and triceps brachii, TB) and kinematics of multiple joints between a cable and standard selectorized machines during the biceps curl, the chest press, and the overhead press performed at 1.5 seconds per contractile stage. Fifteen individuals (9 men, 6 women; mean age ± SD, 24.33 ± 4.88 years) participated. Machine order was randomized. Significant differences favoring cable training were seen for PM and AD during biceps curl; BB, AD, and EO for chest press; and BB and EO during overhead press (p ≤ 0.05). Greater starting and ending angles were seen for the elbow and shoulder joints during selectorized biceps curl, whereas hip and knee starting and ending angles were greater for cable machine during chest and overhead presses (p < 0.0001). Greater range of motion (ROM) favoring the cable machine was also evident (p < 0.0001). These results indicate that utilization patterns of selected muscles, joint angles, and ROMs can be varied because of machine application even when similar exercises are used, and therefore, these machines can be used selectively in training programs requiring specific motor or biomechanical patterns.