Table 2.
Summary of Dynamic RT Intervention Characteristics (k=71)
| Program Characteristics | k | Mean±SD | Range | Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participants (n) at baseline | 71 | 21.1±14.9 | 8.0, 72.0 | 15.0 |
| Participants (n) post‐RT | 71 | 18.4±11.4 | 8.0, 60.0 | 14.0 |
| Attrition in RT group (%) | 71 | 8.5±13.1 | 0.0, 53.0 | 0.0 |
| Exercise adherence (%) | 46 | 92.3±8.9 | 60.0, 100.0 | 95.0 |
| Dynamic RT FITT | ||||
| Length (weeks) | 71 | 14.4±7.9 | 6.0, 48.0 | 12.0 |
| Frequency (days/week) | 71 | 2.8±0.6 | 2.0, 5.0 | 3.0 |
| Intensity or Load | ||||
| % of 1‐RM | 38 | 64.7±13.0 | 30.0, 87.5 | 65.0 |
| % of MVC | 2 | 90.0±14.4 | 80.0, 100.0 | |
| 10 to 15 RM | 8 | 12.6% | ||
| 8 to 12 RM | 8 | 12.5% | ||
| 6 to 16 RM | 2 | 3.1% | ||
| OMNI‐RT Scale | 2 | 3.1% | ||
| Theraband (not specified) | 3 | 4.7% | ||
| % of 1‐RM (estimated)a | 63 | 67.2±12.4 | 30.0, 100.0 | 70.0 |
| MET (estimated)b | 71 | 4.7±1.8 | 2.8, 8.5 | 3.8 |
| Time (total work/session) | ||||
| Number of exercises/session | 69 | 7.9±2.9 | 1.0, 16.0 | 7.0 |
| Number sets/exercise | 67 | 2.8±0.9 | 1.0, 5.0 | 3.0 |
| Number repetitions/set | 65 | 11.0±3.8 | 5.0, 30.0 | 10.0 |
| Rest interval/recovery (s) | 30 | 96.3±43.3 | 15.0, 180.0 | 90.0 |
| Type of RT protocol | ||||
| Conventional RT | 54 | 76.0% | ||
| Circuit‐style RT | 10 | 14.3% | ||
| Theraband | 4 | 5.7% | ||
| Ankle or shin weights | 2 | 2.9% | ||
| Muscle groups targeted | ||||
| Upper and lower body | 63 | 91.3% | ||
| Lower body | 4 | 5.8% | ||
| Unilateral, upper body | 2 | 2.9% | ||
% indicates percentage; FITT, frequency, intensity, time, and type; k, number of observations; MET, metabolic equivalent unit; MVC, maximum voluntary contraction; Range, minimum, maximum values; Reps, repetitions; RM, repetition maximum; RT, resistance training; s, seconds.
a
% of 1‐RM was estimated for studies that reported RT intensity/load as 1‐RM range or MVC (%); represents the mean 1‐RM (%) after combining the estimated and reported values (k=38).
b
Standardized estimate of RT intensity/load; METs were assigned to all RT interventions so that RT intensity/loads could be quantified across studies, including unreported data (k=12) and units other than 1‐RM or MVC (k=39).