Table 4.
Summary of impact of participant exposure, study duration, and adherence in studies that measured body composition in older women.
| Study and Duration | # Sets | # Reps (Midpoint of Range) | # Exercises | Participant Exposure Score (Reps x Sets x Exercises) | Total Sessions (Times/Wk x Total # Weeks) | Total Minutes (# Sessions x Minutes/Session) | Adherence | >Muscle Mass, FFM or LBM | <%BF | Other Body Comp Measure |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short-length study (<12 wks) | ||||||||||
| dos Santos [33] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 24 | ? | ≥85% | x | ||
| dos Santos [34] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 24 | ? | ≥85% | x (mostly android) | ||
| Nabuco [43] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 24 | ? | ? | High PRO | ||
| Medium-length studies (≥12 to <24 wks) | ||||||||||
| Aguiar [21] | 2 | 12.5 | 8 | 200 | 36 | 2160 | ? | x | NC by measurement | |
| Barbalho [22] | 3.75 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 24 | ? | 95% | |||
| Bocalini [23] | 1 | Timed reps | 12 | ? | 36 | 1800 | >90% | x | X not measured | |
| Carrasco-Poyatos [25] | 1 | 8 | 8 | 60 | 36 | 2160 | ? | >both Pilates and RT | ||
| Cavalcante [26] | 1 | 12.5 | 8 | 250 | 40 | 1200 | ≥85% | Both 2x/wk and 3x/wk< | ||
| Coelho-Junior [27] | 2 | 13.5 | 9 | 364.5 | 44 | ? | 89% | NC | NC by measure | |
| Cunha [29] | 2 | 12.5 | 8 | 100 LV or 300 HV | 36 | 540 LV or 1620 HV | ≥85% | >both low and high volume | ||
| Daly [30] | 3 | 9 | 7 | 189 | 48 | 2880 | 89% | >in LBM, FFM in fortified milk group | %BF < in both grps but more in Milk Grp | <Fat mass |
| Francis [35] | 3.5 | 12 | 9 | 378 | 36 | 1908 | 82–86% | >leg lean tissue in both PRO + PRO + RT | ||
| Gadelha [36] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 72 | ? | ≥75% | >FFM in RT vs. CTL | NC | Sarcopenic obesity index > in RT vs. CTL |
| Gualano [37] | 2 | 10 | 7 | 175 | 60 | ? | ≥84% | RT + CR ≥ appendicular LBM vs. PL, CR and PL + RT | Fat mass (kg) did not change between grps | |
| Kim [38] | 1 | 8 | varying | ? | 24 | ? | 70–80% | Leg LBM > EX + AA and EX | ||
| Liao [40] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 36 | 1980 | ? | Ex bands > LBM | %BF < in EG vs. CG | Ex bands > muscle quality |
| Mori [41] | 2.5 | 10 | 7 | 175 | 48 | ? | 87–90% | >LBM in EX + PRO vs. EX or PRO | ||
| Nabuco [42] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 36 | ? | ? | Exercise + whey PRO > LBM vs. placebo | ||
| Nabuco [44] | 3 | 8 | 8 | 192 | 36 | ? | ? | RT+ PRO > LBM vs. RT+PLA | <%BF in RT+PRO vs. RT+PLA | |
| Nascimento [45] | 1 | 12.5 | 8 | 100 | 48 (2x) or 72 (3x) | ? | 92–93% adherence | 2 or 3x/wk > LBM | ||
| Rabelo [46] | 3 | 10 | 10 | 300 | 72 | 4320 | ≥85% | RT > LBM | ||
| Radaelli [47] | 2 | 14.5 | 10 | L: 145 H: 435 |
26 | L: 585 H: 1430 |
Muscle thickness and neuromuscular adaptations > similarly in both groups | |||
| Ribeiro [51] | 3 | 11.5 | 8 | 300 | 96 | ? | ≥85% | Both pyramid and constant training > LBM | Neither grp changed | |
| Ribeiro [52] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 48 | ? | ≥85% | Both pyramid and trad > LBM | ||
| Strandberg [54] | 3 | 13.5 | 7 | 283.5 | 48 | ? | ? | Lean leg mass > only in RT + healthy diet | ||
| Strandberg [55] | 3 | 13.5 | 7 | 283.5 | 48 | ? | ? | Sig hypertrophy of T2 muscle fibers only in RT + PUFA-not RT only or CTL | ||
| Sugihara [56] | 3 | 10 | 8 | 240 | 36 | 1800 | ? | Both RT+PRO and RT + PLA > LBM (but RT + PRO >) | Both RT+PRO and RT + PLA > muscle quality | |
AA = amino acids; % BF = percent body fat; CTL or CG = control group; EG = experimental group; FFM = fat-free mass; LBM = lean body mass; NC = no change; PLA = placebo; PRO = protein; PUFA = polyunsaturated fatty acids; RT = resistance training.