| Methods |
RCT with 3 groups: PRT, control, and aerobic training group
Method of randomisation: rank ordered then randomly stratified into 3 groups, with the restriction that more would be assigned to training groups
Assessor blinding: no
Participant blinding: no
Loss to Follow‐up: 8 total (4 in PRT and control)
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no
Post‐program follow up: no, but 6 month exercise program |
| Participants |
Location: USA
N = 57 in total (36 in PRT and control)
Sample: sedentary men and women
Age: mean 72 years
Inclusion criteria: free from overt evidence of coronary heart disease or any other conditions that would limit their participation in vigorous exercise; aged 70‐79, sedentary for one year
Exclusion criteria: blood pressure >160/100; ECG changes or cardiac symptoms during exercise testing |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control and versus aerobic
1. PRT
Type of Ex: 5UL, 2LL, 3 Tr
Equipment: variable resistance machines (Nautilus)
Intensity: initially light to moderate, by week 14 encouraged to train to fatigue
Frequency: Ex3
Reps/Sets: 8‐12/ 1
Program Duration: 26 weeks
Setting: gym
Supervision: not reported
Adherence: 97.8% sessions attended (excluding drop‐outs), 87% stayed with program
2. Control Group: not reported
3. Aerobic Training Group: 3 sessions per week of walk/jog program for 26 weeks, aimed for duration of 35‐45min minutes at 75‐85% VO2 max by week 26 |
| Outcomes |
Strength
VO2 max
Adverse events
Reaction time
Comments on adverse events: yes (a priority outcome, well‐ defined) |
| Notes |
Data from PRT and aerobic training group were compared |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
