In order to improve the applicability of research to exercise professionals, it is suggested that researchers analyze and report data in intervention studies that can be interpreted in relation to other studies. The effect size and proposed scale for determining the magnitude of the treatment effect can assist strength and conditioning professionals in interpreting and applying the findings of the strength training studies.

Purpose-The effectiveness of resistance exercise for strength improvement among aging persons is inconsistent across investigations, and there is a lack of research synthesis for multiple strength outcomes.Methods-The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the effect of resistance exercise (RE) for multiple strength outcomes in aging adults. Randomized controlled trials and randomized or non-randomized studies among adults ≥ 50 years, were included. Data were pooled using random effect models. Outcomes for 4 common strength tests were analyzed for main effects. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the Cochran Q and I 2 statistics, and publication bias was evaluated through physical inspection of funnel plots as well as formal rankcorrelation statistics. A linear mixed model regression was incorporated to examine differences between outcomes, as well as potential study-level predictor variables.Results-Forty-seven studies were included, representing 1079 participants. A positive effect for each of the strength outcomes was determined however there was heterogeneity between studies. Regression revealed that higher intensity training was associated with greater improvement. Strength increases ranged from 9.8 -31.6 kg, and percent changes were 29 ± 2, 24 ± 2, 33 ± 3, and 25 ± 2, respectively for leg press, chest press, knee extension, and lat pull.Conclusions-RE is effective for improving strength among older adults, particularly with higher intensity training. Findings therefore suggest that RE may be considered a viable strategy to prevent generalized muscular weakness associated with ageing.

The dose-response trends identified in this analysis support the theory of progression in resistance program design and can be useful in the development of training programs designed to optimize the effort to benefit ratio.

Accurate correlations between a wide range of physical fitness measures and occupational demands are needed in order to identify specific fitness tests and training needs for firefighters. Twenty professional firefighters performed numerous fitness and job-related performance tests. Pearson product moment correlations were performed to identify the relationship between fitness components and job performance. Significant correlations (p <0.05) with job performance were identified for total fitness (r = -0.62), bench press strength (r = -0.66), hand grip strength (r = -0.71), bent-over row endurance (r = -0.61), bench press endurance (r = -0.73), shoulder press endurance (r = -0.71), bicep endurance (r = -0.69), squat endurance (r = -0.47), and 400-m sprint time (r = 0.79). It is apparent that firefighting taxes virtually all aspects of physical fitness. These data can help the exercise specialist choose appropriate tests and prescribe specific fitness programs for firefighters. Traditional firefighter exercise programs focusing mainly on cardiovascular fitness should be replaced with physical conditioning programs that address all components of fitness.

The primary objective of this investigation was to identify which components of endurance training (e.g., modality, duration, frequency) are detrimental to resistance training outcomes. A meta-analysis of 21 studies was performed with a total of 422 effect sizes (ESs). Criteria for the study included were (a) compare strength training alone to strength plus endurance training (concurrent) or to compare combinations of concurrent training; (b) the outcome measures include at least one measure of strength, power, or hypertrophy; and (c) the data necessary to calculate ESs must be included or available. The mean ES for hypertrophy for strength training was 1.23; for endurance training, it was 0.27; and for concurrent training, it was 0.85, with strength and concurrent training being significantly greater than endurance training only. The mean ES for strength development for strength training was 1.76; for endurance training, it was 0.78; and for concurrent training, it was 1.44. Strength and concurrent training was significantly greater than endurance training. The mean ES for power development for strength training only was 0.91; for endurance training, it was 0.11; and for concurrent training, it was 0.55. Significant differences were found between all the 3 groups. For moderator variables, resistance training concurrently with running, but not cycling, resulted in significant decrements in both hypertrophy and strength. Correlational analysis identified significant negative relationships between frequency (-0.26 to -0.35) and duration (-0.29 to -0.75) of endurance training for hypertrophy, strength, and power. Significant relationships (p < 0.05) between ES for decreased body fat and % maximal heart rate (r = -0.60) were also found. Our results indicate that interference effects of endurance training are a factor of the modality, frequency, and duration of the endurance training selected.