Skip to main content
. 2016 Dec 8;18(6):881–891. doi: 10.1007/s10522-016-9671-7

Table 2.

Change in LTM, muscle function and functional capability in healthy older women

Treatment effect Treatment effect (%)
P a 1 − β P a 1 − β
LTM (kg)
 PRO −0.21 (−0.8 to 0.3) 0.133 −0.6 (−2.0 to 0.9) 0.142
 PRO + EX 0.34 (−0.2 to 0.9) 1.0 (−0.5 to 2.5)
Upper leg LTM (kg)
 PRO 0.04 (−0.07 to 0.01) 0.027 0.606 1.2 (−0.2 to 2.6) 0.017 0.680
 PRO + EX 0.13 (0.08–0.18) 3.6 (2.3 to 5.0)
Knee extensor torque (N m)
 PRO −1.6 (−7.3 to 4.4) 0.007 0.784 −1.3 (−7.8 to 5.9) 0.008 0.766
 PRO + EX 10.2 (4.3–15.8) 12.7 (5.6–19.0)
Muscle quality (N m kg−1)
 PRO −0.8 (−2.2 to 1.0) 0.062 −2.4 (−8.1 to 5.1) 0.046 0.520
 PRO + EX 1.8 (0.0 to 3.2) 9.0 (1.6–14.6)
900 m gait speed (m s−1)b
 PRO −0.01 (−0.52 to.−0.04) 0.001 −0.4 (−2.6 to 1.8) 0.001
 PRO + EX* 0.10 (0.05–0.22) 3.8 (3.0–8.4)
5 Chair REP (s)b
 RO −0.01 (−0.48 to 0.45) 0.749 0.8 (−4.9 to 6.5) 0.793
 PRO + EX* 0.01 (−0.23 to 0.60) 0.1 (−2.8 to 6.8)
Chair REP 30 s (n)c
 PRO −1.0 (−1.8 to −0.2) 0.572 −4.2 (−7.8 to −6.2) 0.904
 PRO + EX* −0.5 (−2.0 to 0.0) −5.3 (−10.0 to 0.0)

LTM lean tissue mass, REP repetition, 1 − β statistical power

Data are means (95% CIs) and * medians (Bootstrap 95% CIs). Treatment effect = (value at 12 week − value at baseline)

aP values for the difference in treatment effect, PRO compared with PRO + PRT, analysed by univariate ANOVA or Kruskall Wallis Test with treatment group as a fixed factor

bPRO, n = 25, PRO + PRT, n = 26

cPRO, n = 17, PRO + PRT, n = 14