Table 1.
Studies examining the effects of RT on variables of muscle strength and muscle morphology in healthy old adults
| Study | Sex | Age (years) | N | Muscles/functional movement | Period (weeks) | Strength gain (%) | Gain in measure of muscle morphology (%) | Within subject SMD (SMDws) | Between subject SMD (SMDbs) | Training variables |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beneka et al. [31] | M/F | 66–72 Mean age: 69 |
M: 8/8/8/8 HI/MI/LI/CG F: 8/8/8/8 HI/MI/LI/CG |
Knee extension | 16 | 1RM male HI: 11 MI: 8 LI: 4 CG: −2 n.s. 1RM female HI: 15 MI: 7 LI: 3 CG: −1 n.s. |
1RM male HI: 1.36 MI: 1.14 LI: 0.43 CG: −0.16 1RM female HI: 3.58 MI: 0.71 LI: 0.69 CG: −0.13 |
1RM male HI vs. CG: 1.17 MI vs. CG: 0.77 LI vs. CG: 0.25 HI vs. MI: 0.33 HI vs. LI: 1.03 MI vs. LI: 0.60 1RM female HI vs. CG: 1.92 MI vs. CG: 0.62 LI vs. CG: 0.83 n.s. HI vs. MI: 3.18 HI vs. LI: 3.49 MI vs. LI: −0.10 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets HI: 4–6 reps; 90 % 1RM MI: 8–10 reps; 70 % 1RM LI: 12–14 reps; 50 % 1RM; TUT: 6 s; 2 s con, 2–3 s iso, 2–3 s ecc; RIS: 120 s; RIR: 5 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Charette et al. [92] | F | 64–86 Mean age: 68 |
13/6 | Leg press | 12 | 1RM RT: 27–106 CG: −2 to 11 n.s. |
1RM RT: 5.92–11.00 CG: −0.12 to 1.17 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 1.98–7.42 |
RT: 3×/week; 3–6 sets; 6 reps; 1–5 weeks: 65 % 1RM 6–9 weeks: 70 % 1RM 10–12 weeks: 75 % 1RM; TUT: 5 s; 2 s con, 3 s ecc; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Daly et al. [93] | M/F | Mean age: 75 | 8/8 | Upper extremity | 6 | 1RM RT: −33 to 14 NPA CG: −19 to 28 NPA |
MRI/MV RT: 1–4 NPA CG: −3 to −1 NPA |
1RM RT: −0.07 to 1.00 CG: −0.41 to 0.11 MV RT: −0.11 to 0.13 CG: −0.02 to −0.08 |
1RM RT vs. CG: −0.17 to 0.50 MV RT vs. CG: 0.36–0.52 |
RT: 3×/week; 1 week: 3 sets; 8 reps; 60 % 1RM 2 weeks: 3 sets; 8 reps; 70 % 1RM 3–6 weeks: 2 sets; 8 reps; 75 % 1RM; RIS: 60–90 s; weight machines and free weight CG: no intervention |
| DeBeliso et al. [94] | M/F | 63–83 Mean age: 72 |
13/17/13 FR/PER/CG |
Lower extremity | 18 | 1RM FR: 50–67 PER: 70–81 CG: −5 to 25 |
1RM FR: 1.40–2.33 PER: 1.08–2.09 CG: −0.10 to 0.72 |
1RM FR vs. CG: 1.33–1.80 PER vs. CG: 1.22–1.37 FR vs. PER: 0.07–0.21 |
RT: 2×/week; FR: 3 sets; 9RM PER: 1–6 weeks; 2 sets; 15RM 7–12 weeks; 3 sets; 9RM 13–18 weeks; 4 sets; 6RM; 60 min; RIS: 120–180 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Fatouros et al. [95] | M | 65–78 Mean age: 70 |
8/8 | Upper/lower extremity | 16 | IS RT: 14 CG: −1 n.s. 1RM upper RT: 114 CG: 1 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 77 CG: 3 n.s. |
IS RT: 1.71 CG: −0.08 1RM upper RT: 6.65 CG: 0.02 1RM lower RT: 7.23 CG: 0.20 |
IS RT vs. CG: 1.38 1RM upper RT vs. CG: 3.65 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 4.88 |
RT: 3×/week; 1–4 weeks: 2 sets; 13 reps; 55–60 % 1RM 5–8 weeks: 3 sets; 12 reps; 60–70 % 1RM 9–12 weeks: 3 sets; 10 reps; 70–80 % 1RM 13–16 weeks; 3 sets; 8 reps; 80 % 1RM; 45–50 min; TUT: 7.5 s; 2–3 s con, 2 s iso, 2–3 s ecc; RIS: 120 s; RIR: 5 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Fatouros et al. [33] | M | 65–78 Mean age: 71 |
14/12/14/10 HI/MI/LI/CG |
Upper/lower extremities | 24 | 1RM upper HI: 73 MI: 48 LI: 34 CG: 2 n.s. 1RM lower HI: 63 MI: 53 LI: 38 CG: −2 n.s. |
1RM upper HI: 3.52 MI: 2.25 LI: 1.77 C: 0.10 1RM lower HI: 4.94 MI: 5.45 LI: 4.86 C: −0.18 |
1RM upper HI vs. CG: 2.71 MI vs. CG: 1.93 LI vs. CG: 1.38 HI vs. MI: 0.78 HI vs. LI: 1.44 MI vs. LI: 0.63 1RM lower HI vs. CG: 4.10 MI vs. CG: 3.75 LI vs. CG: 3.34 HI vs. MI: 0.62 HI vs. LI: 1.81 MI vs. LI: 1.22 |
RT: 3×/week; 2–3 sets; 8–15 reps HI: 80 % 1RM MI: 60 % 1RM LI: 40 % 1RM; TUT: 7.5 s; 2–3 s con, 2–3 s iso, 2–3 s ecc; HI RIS: 360 s MI RIS: 240 s LI RIS: 120 s; RIR: 3–5 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Granacher et al. [36] | M/F | 60–80 Mean age: 67 |
20/20 | Lower extremity | 13 | MVC RT: 27 CG: −4 n.s. |
MVC RT: 1.24 CG: −0.16 |
MVC RT vs. CG: 1.15 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 10 reps; 80 % 1 RM; 60-min sessions; RIS: 120 s; weight machines; CG: no intervention |
|
| Henwood and Taaffe [40] | M/F | 65–84 Mean age: 70 |
22/22 | Upper/lower extremities | 8 | 1RM upper RT: 2 n.s. –25 CG: −3 to −14 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 11–27 CG: −10 to 3 n.s. |
1RM upper RT: 0.06–0.54 CG: −0.30 to −0.09 1RM lower RT: 0.35–1.06 CG: −0.22 to 0.07 |
1RM upper RT vs. CG: 3.62–5.02 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 4.30–7.66 |
RT: 2×/week; 3 sets; 8 reps; 75 % 1RM; 60-min sessions; RIS: 60 s; TUT: 6 s; con: 3 s, ecc: 3 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Hortobagyi et al. [34] | M/F | 66–83 Mean age: 72 |
9/9/9 HI/LI/CG |
Leg press | 10 | MVC HI: 24 n.s. LI: 28 n.s. CG: 2 n.s. IS HI: 38 n.s. LI: 29 n.s. CG: 1 n.s. 1RM HI: 35 n.s. LI: 33 n.s. CG: 3 n.s. |
MVC HI: 1.06 LI: 1.00 CG: −0.10 IS HI: 1.17 LI: 0.84 CG: −0.02 1RM HI: 1.05 LI: 0.78 CG: −0.10 |
MVC HI vs. CG: 0.89 LI vs. CG: 0.67 HI vs. LI: 0.03 n.s. IS HI vs. CG: 0.86 LI vs. CG: 0.37 HI vs. LI: 0.45 n.s. 1RM HI vs. CG: 1.05 LI vs. CG: 0.52 HI vs. LI: 0.41 n.s. |
RT: 3 ×/week; HI: 5 sets; 4–6 reps; 80 % 1RM LI: 5 sets; 8–12 reps; 40 % 1RM; TUT: 3 s; 1–2 s con, 1–2 s ecc; RIS: 120 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Hunter et al. [96] | M/F | 61–77 Mean age: 66 |
14/14/14 HI/VI/CG |
Knee extension/elbow flexion | 25 | 1RM HI: 13–24 VI: 10–28 CG: −6 to −2 n.s. |
BP/FFM HI: 4 VI: 4 CG: 1 n.s. |
1RM HI: 0.43–0.74 VI: 0.21–0.75 CG: −0.18 to −0.04 FFM HI: 0.19 VI: 0.17 CG: 0.03 |
1RM HI vs. CG: 0.85–1.13 VI vs. CG: 0.05–0.67 HI vs. VI: 0.61–0.96 n.s. FFM HI vs. CG: 0.38 VI vs. CG: −0.23 HI vs. CG: 0.71 n.s. |
RT: 3 ×/week; 2 sets; 10 reps; 45-min session; RIS: 120 s; weight machines HI: 80 % 1RM VI: 50, 65, 80 % 1RM across the 3 sessions per week CG: no intervention |
| Judge et al. [43] | M/F | ≥75 Mean age: 80 |
28/27 | Lower extremity | 13 | 1RM RT: 12 CG: −3 n.s. |
1RM RT: 0.64 CG: −0.05 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 0.11 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 12 reps; 75 % RM; 45-min session; TUT: 4 s; 2 s con, 2 s ecc; RIS: 120–180 s; RIR: 1–2 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Kalapotharakos et al. [35] | M/F | 60–74 Mean age: 65 |
11/12/10 HI/MI/CG |
Upper/lower extremities | 12 | 1RM upper HI: 66 MI: 43 CG: −1 n.s. 1RM lower HI: 78 MI: 44 CG: 0 n.s |
CT/CSA HI: 10 MI: 7 CG: −1 n.s. |
1RM upper HI: 2.73 MI: 1.62 CG: −0.04 1RM lower HI: 3.13 MI: 1.45 CG: 0.02 CSA HI: 0.34 MI: 0.37 CG: −0.02 |
1RM upper HI vs. CG: 2.11 MI vs. CG: 1.47 HI vs. MI: 0.50 1RM lower HI vs. CG: 2.51 MI vs. CG: 1.51 HI vs. MI: 0.97 CSA HI vs. CG: 0.38 MI vs. CG: 0.34 HI vs. MI: 0.10 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; HI: 8 reps; 80 % 1RM MI: 15 reps; 60 % 1RM; TUT: 6 s; 2 s con, 2 s iso, 2 s ecc; RIS: 120 s; RIR: 2–3 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
| Kalapotharakos et al. [71] | M | 61–75 Mean age: 68 |
9/9 | Lower extremity | 10 | 1RM RT: 24 CG: 0 n.s. |
1RM RT: 0.83 CG: 0.01 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 1.50 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 15 reps; 60 % 1RM; 60-min session; RIS: 120 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Lovell et al. [97] | M/F | 70–80 Mean age: 74 |
12/12 | Leg extension | 16 | 1RM RT: 90 CG: −1 n.s. |
CT/LM RT: 7 CG: 1 n.s. |
1RM RT: 5.97 CG: −0.07 LM RT: 0.14 CG: 0.03 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 4.33 LM RT vs. CG: 0.10 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 6–10 reps; 70–90 % 1RM; RIS: 120 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
| Miszko et al. [98] | M/F | 65–90 Mean age: 72 |
13/15 | Lower extremity | 16 | 1RM upper RT: 14 CG: −1 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 23 CG: 5 n.s. |
1RM upper RT: 0.28 CG: 0.01 1RM lower RT: 0.43 CG: 0.11 |
1RM upper RT vs. CG: 0.33 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 0.53 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 6–8 reps; 1–8 weeks: 50–70 % 1RM 9–16 weeks: 80 % 1RM; TUT: 4 s; 4 s con; weight machines + free weights CG: no intervention |
|
| Morse et al. [99] | M | 70–82 Mean age: 74 |
13/8 | Lower extremity (ankle) | 52 | MVC RT: 0 n.s.−25 CG: −2 to 5 n.s. |
MRI/MV RT: 15 CG: 2 n.s. |
MVC RT: 0.00–1.29 CG: −0.09 to 0.35 MV RT: 1.53 CG: 0.22 |
MVC RT vs. CG: 0.89 BD−1.51 MV RT vs. CG: 1.03 |
RT: 3×/week (2 × group based, 1 × home based); 2 − 3 sets; 8 − 10 reps; 80 % 1RM; rubber bands, weight machines CG: no intervention |
| Pinto et al. [41] | F | 60–69 Mean age: 66 |
19/17 | Lower extremity | 6 | 1RM RT: 22 CG: −1 n.s. |
US/MT RT: 11–21 CG: −5 to 7 n.s. |
1RM RT: 1.16 CG: −0.04 MT RT: 0.59–0.90 CG: −0.38 to 0.24 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 1.33 MT RT vs. CG: 0.52–0.99 |
RT: 2×/week; 1–3 weeks: 2 sets; 15–20 reps 4–6 weeks: 3 sets; 12–15 reps; RIS: 120 s CG: no intervention |
| Pyka et al. [39] | M/F | 61–78 Mean age: 68 |
8/6 | Upper/lower extremities | 52 | 1RM upper RT: 23–51 CG: −4 to −12 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 27–62 CG: −3 to −12 n.s. |
1RM upper RT: 3.30–5.38 CG: −1.35 to −0.63 1RM lower RT: 4.50–9.51 CG: −1.45 to −0.32 |
1RM upper RT vs. CG: 4.69–6.12 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 5.87–7.67 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 8 reps; 65–75 % 1RM; 60-min sessions; TUT: 5 s; 2 s con, 3 s ecc; RIS: 60 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Raso et al. [42] | F | 60–77 Mean age: 68 |
14/9 | Trunk/lower extremity | 52 | 1RM RT: 48 CG: 5 n.s. |
N/A/FFM RT: −3 n.s CG: −2 n.s. |
1RM RT: 4.73 CG: 0.67 FFM RT: −0.22 CG: −0.20 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 2.20 FFM RT vs. CG: 0.20 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 12 reps; 55 % 1RM; 60-min sessions; TUT: 4 s; 1–2 s con, 2–3 s ecc; RIS: 120 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
| Reeves et al. [37] | M/F | 65–79 Mean age: 71 |
9/9 | Lower extremity | 14 | MVC RT: 15 CG: −12 n.s. |
MVC RT: 0.32 CG: −0.45 |
MVC RT vs. CG: 0.52 NPA |
RT: 3×/week; 2 sets; 10 reps; 70–75 % 1RM; TUT: 5 s; 2 s con, 3 s ecc; RIS: 180 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
|
| Rhodes et al. [100] | F | 65–75 Mean age: 69 |
20/18 | Upper/lower extremity | 52 | 1RM upper RT: 9 n.s. –25 CG: 0–2 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 19–54 CG: −4 to 1 n.s. |
1RM upper RT: 0.55–1.70 CG: 0.02–0.09 1RM lower RT: 0.83–2.62 CG: −0.21 to 0.06 |
1RM upper RT vs. CG: 0.60–1.25 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 1.28–2.85 |
RT: 3 ×/week; 3 sets; 8 reps; 75 % 1RM; 60-min sessions; TUT: 6 s; 2–3 s con, 3–4 s ecc CG: no intervention |
|
| Strasser et al. [72] | M/F | ≥70 Mean age: 74 |
15/14 | Upper/lower extremities | 26 | 1RM upper RT: 24–31 CG: 3 n.s. 1RM lower RT: 15 CG: 9 n.s. |
1RM upper RT: 0.61–0.76 CG: 0.10–0.12 1RM lower RT: 0.47 CG: 0.35 |
1RM upper RT vs. CG: 1.00–1.40 1RM lower RT vs. CG: 0.77 BD |
RT: 3×/week; 3–6 sets; 10–15 reps; 60–70 % 1RM CG: no intervention |
|
| Tracy et al. [38] | M/F | 65–80 Mean age: 74 |
11/9 | Knee extension | 16 | MVC RT: 26 CG: −1 n.s. 1RM RT: 27 CG: 2 n.s. |
MVC RT: 0.81 CG: −0.05 1RM RT: 0.67 CG: 0.05 |
MVC RT vs. CG: 0.27 1RM RT vs. CG: 0.53 |
RT: 3×/week; 3 sets; 10 reps; 80 % 1RM CG: no intervention |
|
| Vincent et al. [32] | M/F | 60–83 Mean age: 68 |
22/24/16 HI/LI/CG |
Upper/lower extremities, trunk (total strength) |
24 | 1RM HI: 18 LI: 17 CG: −1 n.s. |
CT/FFM HI: 0.4 n.s. LI: −3.6 n.s. CG: −1 n.s. |
1RM HI: 0.42 LI: 0.45 CG: −0.04 FFM HI: 0.02 LI: −0.12 CG: −0.05 |
1RM HI vs. CG: 0.66 LI vs. CG: 0.49 HI vs. LI: 0.25 n.s. FFM HI vs. C: 0.17 LI vs. C: 0.22 HI vs. LI: −0.06 NPA |
RT: 3×/week; 1 set; HI: 8 reps; 80 % 1RM LI: 13 reps; 50 % 1RM; RIS: 120 s; weight machines CG: no intervention |
| Vincent et al. [73] | M/F | 60–72 Mean age: 69 |
10/10 | Total body strength | 24 | 1RM RT: 16 CG: −2 n.s. |
CT/FFM RT: 4 n.s. CG: 1 n.s. |
1RM RT: 1.35 CG: −0.15 FFM RT: 0.57 CG: 0.13 |
1RM RT vs. CG: 0.08 FFM RT vs. CG: 1.30 |
RT: 3×/week; 1 set; 8–13 reps; 50–80 % 1RM; weight machines CG: no intervention |
1RM one-repetition maximum, BD baseline differences (p > 0.05), BP BOD POD (air displacement plethysmograph for whole-body densitometry), CG control group, con concentric, CSA cross-sectional area, CT computed tomography, ecc eccentric, F female, FFM fat-free mass, FR fixed repetitions, HI high-intensity, IS isokinetic strength, iso isometric, LI low-intensity, LM lean mass, M male, MI moderate-intensity, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, MT muscle thickness, MV muscle volume, MVC maximal voluntary contraction, N/A not available, NPA no p values available, n.s. not significant, PER periodized repetitions, reps repetitions, RIR rest in between repetitions, RIS rest in between sets, RT resistance training, SMD bs difference between the post-test treatment and the control means divided by the pooled standard deviation with 95 % confidence intervals, SMD ws difference of mean of post-test and mean of pre-test divided by standard deviation of pre-value, TUT total time under tension, US ultrasonography, VI variable intensity