Skeletal muscle wasting is common and insidious in patients who receive maintenance hemodialysis treatment for the management of ESRD. The objective of this study was to determine whether 12 wk of high-intensity, progressive resistance training (PRT) administered during routine hemodialysis treatment could improve skeletal muscle quantity and quality versus usual care. Forty-nine patients (62.6 ؎ 14.2 yr; 0.3 to 16.7 yr on dialysis) were recruited from the outpatient hemodialysis unit of the St. George Public Hospital (Sydney, Australia). Patients were randomized to PRT ؉ usual care (n ‫؍‬ 24) or usual care control only (n ‫؍‬ 25). The PRT group performed two sets of 10 exercises at a high intensity (15 to 17/20 on the Borg Scale) using free weights, three times per week for 12 wk during routine hemodialysis treatment. Primary outcomes included thigh muscle quantity (cross-sectional area [CSA]) and quality (intramuscular lipid content via attenuation) evaluated by computed tomography scan. Secondary outcomes included muscle strength, exercise capacity, body circumference measures, proinflammatory cytokine C-reactive protein, and quality of life. There was no statistically significant difference in muscle CSA change between groups. However, there were statistically significant improvements in muscle attenuation, muscle strength, mid-thigh and mid-arm circumference, body weight, and C-reactive protein in the PRT group relative to the nonexercising control group. These findings suggest that patients with ESRD can improve skeletal muscle quality and derive other health-related adaptations solely by engaging in a 12-wk high-intensity PRT regimen during routine hemodialysis treatment sessions. Longer training durations or more sensitive analysis techniques may be required to document alterations in muscle CSA.

The human ageing process is universal, ubiquitous and inevitable. Every physiological function is being continuously diminished. There is a range between two distinct phenotypes of ageing, shaped by patterns of living - experiences and behaviours, and in particular by the presence or absence of physical activity (PA) and structured exercise (i.e., a sedentary lifestyle). Ageing and a sedentary lifestyle are associated with declines in muscle function and cardiorespiratory fitness, resulting in an impaired capacity to perform daily activities and maintain independent functioning. However, in the presence of adequate exercise/PA these changes in muscular and aerobic capacity with age are substantially attenuated. Additionally, both structured exercise and overall PA play important roles as preventive strategies for many chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes, osteoporosis, and obesity; improvement of mobility, mental health, and quality of life; and reduction in mortality, among other benefits. Notably, exercise intervention programmes improve the hallmarks of frailty (low body mass, strength, mobility, PA level, energy) and cognition, thus optimising functional capacity during ageing. In these pathological conditions exercise is used as a therapeutic agent and follows the precepts of identifying the cause of a disease and then using an agent in an evidence-based dose to eliminate or moderate the disease. Prescription of PA/structured exercise should therefore be based on the intended outcome (e.g., primary prevention, improvement in fitness or functional status or disease treatment), and individualised, adjusted and controlled like any other medical treatment. In addition, in line with other therapeutic agents, exercise shows a dose-response effect and can be individualised using different modalities, volumes and/or intensities as appropriate to the health state or medical condition. Importantly, exercise therapy is often directed at several physiological systems simultaneously, rather than targeted to a single outcome as is generally the case with pharmacological approaches to disease management. There are diseases for which exercise is an alternative to pharmacological treatment (such as depression), thus contributing to the goal of deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMS). There are other conditions where no effective drug therapy is currently available (such as sarcopenia or dementia), where it may serve a primary role in prevention and treatment. Therefore, this consensus statement provides an evidence-based rationale for using exercise and PA for health promotion and disease prevention and treatment in older adults. Exercise prescription is discussed in terms of the specific modalities and doses that have been studied in randomised controlled trials for their effectiveness in attenuating physiological changes of ageing, disease prevention, and/or improvement of older adults with chronic disease and disability. Recommendations are proposed to bridge gaps in the current literature and to optimise the use of exercise/PA both as a preventative medicine and as a therapeutic agent.

No abstract

NFECTIONS, PARTICULARLY RESPIRAtory tract infections, are common in elderly individuals, resulting in decreased daily activity, prolonged recovery times, increased health care service use, and more frequent complications, including death. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] In the United States, an estimated 43% of elderly persons will be admitted to a nursing home, with more than 85% of them admitted to long-term (Ͼ1 year) care facilities. 12 Infections occur more frequently in nursing home residents than among independent-living elderly, 2-10,13 and respiratory tract infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. 9,14,15 Contributing to the increased incidence of infection with age is the well-described decline in immune response. 16 For example, those who have diminished delayed-type hypersensitivity skin test responses have higher morbidity and mortality from cancer, pneumonia, and postoperative complications. [17][18][19] Nutritional status is an important determinant of immune function. 20,21 Nutritional supplementation has been shown to enhance the immune response in older persons. 22,23 In our earlier pla-Author Affiliations are listed at the end of this article.

The serious health, social and economic consequences of falls are well documented. Lower extremity muscle weakness and power as well as balance impairment are major independent intrinsic contributors to falls and amenable to intervention. Progressive resistance training (PRT) is widely accepted as an appropriate modality for treating sarcopenia and has been reported to improve balance. However, other studies affirm no significant effect of PRT on balance. To date, there is no clear, definitive statement or synthesis of studies that has examined the effect of PRT on balance. Therefore, our objective was to systematically review the literature to probe the merit of PRT as a single intervention on balance performance in older adults. We conducted a comprehensive search of major electronic databases to October 2006, with citation searches and bibliographic searches of journal articles and literature/systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility and assessed the quality of the studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale for validity assessment. Randomized controlled trials of PRT only, with any balance outcome in participants with a mean age of >/=60 years (individual minimum age >50 years) were included. Trials that contained more than one intervention, providing the PRT and control groups matched the inclusion criteria, were also included. Because of the heterogeneity of interventions and balance outcomes, a meta-analysis was not performed. However, corrected effect sizes with confidence intervals were determined for each study outcome. Twenty-nine studies were compatible with the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were eligible for review. Participants (n = 2174) included healthy, community-dwelling, mobility-limited, frail cohorts and those with chronic comorbidities. Balance outcomes conducted were extensive and were broadly categorized by the authors as: static, dynamic, functional and computerized dynamic posturography. Some studies used more than one balance outcome. The number of balance tests in all totalled 68. Fourteen studies (15 tests representing 22% of all balance tests) reported improvements, significantly greater than controls, in balance performance following PRT. Improvements were not linked to a particular type of balance performance. The inconsistent effect of PRT on balance may be explained by heterogeneity of cohort and balance tests, variability in methodology of the balance test and sample size, inadequate dose of PRT and/or compliance to training, or lack of statistical power. Standardization of balance testing methodology and better reporting of procedures may ensure greater comparability of results in future studies. It is also possible that PRT alone is not a robust intervention for balance control. This is the first systematic synthesis of the literature to examine the effectiveness of PRT alone on balance performance in older adults. The limited evidence presented in currently published data has not consistently shown that the use of PRT in isolation i...

By improving muscle mass, nutritional status, and function, resistance training seems to be effective against the catabolism of a low-protein diet and uremia in patients with renal failure.

No abstract

Design We aimed to evaluate the effect of progressive resistance training on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength in coronary heart disease, when compared to control or aerobic training, and when combined with aerobic training. Secondary aims were to evaluate the safety and efficacy of progressive resistance training on other physiological and clinical outcomes. Methods and results Electronic databases were searched from inception until July 2016. Designs included progressive resistance training vs control, progressive resistance training vs aerobic training, and combined training vs aerobic training. From 268,778 titles, 34 studies were included (1940 participants; 71.9% male; age 60 ± 7 years). Progressive resistance training was more effective than control for lower (standardized mean difference 0.57, 95% confidence interval (0.17-0.96)) and upper (1.43 (0.73-2.13)) body strength. Aerobic fitness improved similarly after progressive resistance training (16.9%) or aerobic training (21.0%); (standardized mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval (-0.35-0.08)). Combined training was more effective than aerobic training for aerobic fitness (0.21 (0.09-0.34), lower (0.62 (0.32-0.92)) and upper (0.51 (0.27-0.74)) body strength. Twenty studies reported adverse event information, with five reporting 64 cardiovascular complications, 63 during aerobic training. Conclusion Isolated progressive resistance training resulted in an increase in lower and upper body strength, and improved aerobic fitness to a similar degree as aerobic training in coronary heart disease cohorts. Importantly, when progressive resistance training was added to aerobic training, effects on both fitness and strength were enhanced compared to aerobic training alone. Reporting of adverse events was poor, and clinical gaps were identified for women, older adults, high intensity progressive resistance training and long-term outcomes, warranting future trials to confirm safety and effectiveness.