| Methods |
RCT with 4 groups: high intensity, medium intensity, and low intensity, and control
Method of randomisation: computerized randomisation program, stratified by gender
Assessor blinding: only for tests at baseline
Participant blinding: blinded to the research hypothesis
Loss to follow‐up: 12 (4‐high intensity, 3‐medium intensity, 3‐low intensity, 2‐control)
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: Australia
N = 28‐HI; N = 28‐MI; N = 28‐LI; N = 28‐control
Sample: independent living older adults
Age: mean 69 years
Inclusion criteria: > 60 years old, living independently in the community, willingness to be randomised and to commit to the study requirements
Exclusion criteria: participation in resistance/power training in the last 6 months, acute or terminal illness, had myocardial infarction in the past 6 months, unstable disease or physical status would interfere with exercise, limb amputation/fraction in the past 3 months, currently symptomatic hernias or hemorrhoids, or cognitive impairment. |
| Interventions |
PRT (high intensity, medium intensity, and low intensity) versus control
1. PRT
Type of Ex: rapid concentric and slow eccentric
Equipment: Keiser machines
Intensity: high (80% of 1RM), medium (50% of 1 RM), low (20% of 1RM)
Frequency: Ex2
Reps/Sets: 8/3
Duration: 8‐12 weeks (M = 10 weeks)
Setting: not reported
Supervision: Experienced exercise trainers
Adherence: > 90% for each training group
2. Control Group: maintain current level of activities |
| Outcomes |
Dynamic muscle strength
Muscle power
Muscle endurance
Balance
Comments on adverse events: yes |
| Notes |
Involved power training |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
