Affective responses to supervised 10-week programs of resistance exercise in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Resistance exercise has numerous, well-documented benefits on the health and functional performance of older adults. However, little information exists on the affective responses to resistance exercise in this population. As affective responses can predict continued exercise behavior, examining if and how they differ between resistance exercise intensities and frequencies in older adults may provide important data to improve resistance exercise prescription. METHODS: We monitored the affective responses of older adults when performing high-velocity, low-load (HVLL) or low-velocity, high-load (LVHL) resistance exercise once or twice weekly. A total of 40 moderately to highly active, but resistance-exercise naïve, older adults (60-79 years) completed 1 of 4 randomly assigned progressive resistance exercise conditions: HVLL once weekly (HVLL1: n = 10), HVLL twice weekly (HVLL2: n = 10), LVHL once weekly (LVHL1: n = 10), or LVHL twice weekly (LVHL2: n = 10). The Physical Activity Affect Scale, Felt Arousal Scale, Feeling Scale, rating of perceived exertion, Visual Analog Scale, and the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale were used to assess enjoyment and affective responses. RESULTS: The results from Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (out of 35) suggest that all exercise conditions were largely and similarly enjoyable to older adults (HVLL1: 30.9 ± 2.4; LVHL1: 31.9 ± 3.6; HVLL2: 30.9 ± 3.5; LVHL2: 30.2 ± 3.7) despite greater fatigue (p = 0.033; ηp2= 0.22) and perceived workload (p = 0.042; ηp2 = 0.20) in LVHL (results from Visual Analog Scale). CONCLUSION: Moderately to highly physically active older adults may tolerate higher intensities of resistance exercise performed once or twice weekly without experiencing a negative impact on enjoyment. However, the role that supervision and social interaction played in shaping the participants' responses is unclear.

Effects of movement velocity and training frequency of resistance exercise on functional performance in older adults: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects that high-velocity, low-load (HVLL) and low-velocity, high-load (LVHL) resistance exercise, performed once or twice-weekly, have on indices of functional performance (primary outcome), maximal strength, and body composition (secondary outcomes) in older adults. METHODS: In a randomised, controlled, multi-armed, parallel design, 54 moderately-highly active, but resistance exercise naïve older adults (aged 60-79 years), attended baseline and post-10-week intervention assessment sessions. Physical and functional assessments were completed, and predicted one-repetition maximums (1-RM) were obtained for eight exercises. Participants were then randomised into one of five conditions: HVLL once-weekly (HVLL1: n = 11) or twice-weekly (HVLL2: n = 11), LVHL once-weekly (LVHL1: n = 10) or twice-weekly (LVHL2: n = 11), no-exercise control condition (CON: n = 11). The HVLL conditions completed 3 sets of 14 repetitions at 40% 1-RM and the LVHL conditions, 3 sets of 7 repetitions at 80% 1-RM. In total, 50 participants completed all testing and were included in analyses. RESULTS: Only LVHL2 improved 30-sec chair stand performance (p = .035; g = 0.89), arm curls (p = .011; g = 1.65) and grip-strength (p = .015; g = 0.34) compared to CON. LVHL2 improved maximal strength compared to CON for 7/8 exercises (p < .05). Whereas, LVHL1 and HVLL2 only improved seated row and chest press compared to CON (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Possibly due to the lower intensity nature of the HVLL conditions, LVHL, twice-weekly was most beneficial for improving functional performance and strength in moderately-highly active older adults. Therefore, we recommend that exercise professionals ensure resistance exercise sessions have sufficient intensity of effort and volume, in order to maximise functional performance and strength gains in older adults.

The acute physiological effects of high- and low-velocity resistance exercise in older adults.

The aim of the present study was to determine if workload matched, high-velocity (HVE) and low-velocity (LVE) resistance exercise protocols, elicit differing acute physiological responses in older adults. Ten older adults completed three sets of eight exercises on six separate occasions (three HVE and three LVE sessions). Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and blood lactate were measured pre- and post-exercise, heart rate was measured before exercise and following each set of each exercise. Finally, a rating of perceived exertion was measured following each set of each exercise. There were no significant differences in blood lactate (F(1,9) = 0.028; P = 0.872; η P 2  = 0.003), heart rate (F(1,9) = 0.045; P = 0.837; η P 2  = 0.005), systolic blood pressure (F(1,9) = 0.023; P = 0.884; η P 2  = 0.003) or diastolic blood pressure (F(1,9) = 1.516; P = 0.249; η P 2  = 0.144) between HVE and LVE. However, LVE elicited significantly greater ratings of perceived exertion compared to HVE (F(1,9) = 13.059; P = 0.006; η P 2  = 0.592). The present workload matched HVE and LVE protocols produced comparable physiological responses, although greater exertion was perceived during LVE.

The perceptual responses to high-velocity, low-load and low-velocity, high-load resistance exercise in older adults.

The present study examined exercise affect during volume-load matched, high-velocity, low-load and low-velocity, high-load resistance exercise conditions in older adults. Ten older adults completed three sets of eight exercises on six separate occasions (three high-velocity, low-load and three low-velocity, high-load sessions) in a crossover study design. High-velocity, low-load was performed at 40% of predicted one repetition maximum, and low-velocity, high-load at 80%. The Physical Activity Affect Scale, Felt Arousal Scale, Feeling Scale, Rating of Perceived Exertion, Visual Analogue Scales, and the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale examined exercise intensity and affect. There were moderate effects of exercise condition on positive exercise affect (P = 0.067; [Formula: see text] = 0.33), and trivial effects on negative exercise affect (P = 0.904; [Formula: see text] = 0.002). Rating of perceived exertion (P < 0.001; [Formula: see text] = 0.41) and fatigue (P = 0.012; [Formula: see text] = 0.52) were greater during low-velocity, high-load. Furthermore, high-velocity, low-load facilitated statistically insignificant, favourable changes (less exertion, more enjoyment etc.) for all other measures. These findings combined with emerging evidence that high-velocity, low-load is superior for improving muscle power and/or functional performance, indicates that high-velocity, low-load should be prescribed preferentially. However, both exercise conditions were enjoyed similarly, demonstrating that individual preference is an important consideration.

Movement velocity during high- and low-velocity resistance exercise protocols in older adults.

The primary aim of the present study was to determine the actual movement velocity of high-velocity, low-load (HVLL) and low-velocity, high-load (LVHL) resistance exercise in a group of older adults. The secondary aim was to examine the differences in velocities produced between male and females. In a crossover study design, four males (age: 67±3years) and five females (age: 68±2years) completed three sets of leg press, calf raise, leg curl, leg extension, chest press, seated row, bicep curl and tricep extension on six separate occasions (three HVLL and three LVHL sessions). The command "as fast as possible" was given for the concentric phase of HVLL, and 2s using a 60-bpm metronome controlled the concentric phase during LVHL. Participants had three days of recovery between each session, and a 7-day period before crossing over to the other protocol. Movement velocity was measured during the concentric and eccentric phases of resistance exercise using two-dimensional video analysis. The concentric phases for all exercises were significantly faster (P<0.001) during HVLL compared to LVHL. Furthermore, males produced significantly greater velocities than females during the concentric phase of the chest press, seated row, bicep curl, and tricep extension for both HVLL and LVHL (P<0.05). These protocols provide a simple solution for exercise professionals to ensure that older adults are training at desired velocities when carrying out resistance exercise, without the need for equipment that measures velocity.

Trunk and Shank Position Influences Patellofemoral Joint Stress in the Lead and Trail Limbs During the Forward Lunge Exercise.

Study Design Controlled laboratory study, repeated-measures design. Background The effects of trunk and shank position on patellofemoral joint stress of the lead limb have been well studied; however, the effects on the trail limb are not well understood. Objectives To test the hypothesis that trunk and shank position may influence patellofemoral joint stress in both limbs during the forward lunge exercise. Methods Patellofemoral kinetics were quantified from 18 healthy participants performing the lunge exercise with different combinations of trunk and shank positions (vertical or forward). A 2-by-3 (limb-by-lunge variation) repeated-measures analysis of variance was performed, using paired t tests for post hoc comparisons. Results The trail limb experienced greater total patellofemoral joint stress relative to the lead limb, regardless of trunk and shank position (P<.0001). The lunge variation with a vertical shank position resulted in significantly greater peak patellofemoral joint stress in the trail limb relative to the lead limb (P<.0001). A forward trunk and shank position resulted in the highest patellofemoral stress in the lead limb (P<.0001). Conclusion Trunk and shank positions have a significant influence on patellofemoral joint loading of both limbs during the forward lunge, with the trail limb generally experiencing greater total joint stress. Restricting forward translation of the lead-limb shank may reduce patellofemoral joint stress at the expense of increased stress in the trail limb. Technique recommendations should consider the demands imposed on both knees during this exercise. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(1):31-40. Epub 4 Nov 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.6336.