Comparison between functional and traditional training exercises on joint mobility, determinants of walking and muscle strength in older women

Resende–Neto, Antônio Gomes de; Nascimento, Matheus Amarante do; Sá, Clodoaldo Antônio De; Ribeiro, Alex Silva; DeSantana, Josimari Melo; Silva-Grigoletto, Marzo Edir Da

doi:10.23736/s0022-4707.19.09751-2

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fifteen articles were eligible for full-text analysis. One article did not have the required intervention [ 64 ], and two did not have the needed comparators [ 65 , 66 ]. In one article, the ST and stretching groups performed a 20–30 min warm-up following an unspecified protocol [ 67 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Afonso

Ramírez‐Campillo

Moscão³

et al. 2021

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Stretching is known to improve range of motion (ROM), and evidence has suggested that strength training (ST) is effective too. However, it is unclear whether its efficacy is comparable to stretching. The goal was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of ST and stretching on ROM (INPLASY 10.37766/inplasy2020.9.0098). (2) Methods: Cochrane Library, EBSCO, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science were consulted in October 2020 and updated in March 2021, followed by search within reference lists and expert suggestions (no constraints on language or year). Eligibility criteria: (P) Humans of any condition; (I) ST interventions; (C) stretching (O) ROM; (S) supervised RCTs. (3) Results: Eleven articles (n = 452 participants) were included. Pooled data showed no differences between ST and stretching on ROM (ES = −0.22; 95% CI = −0.55 to 0.12; p = 0.206). Sub-group analyses based on risk of bias, active vs. passive ROM, and movement-per-joint analyses showed no between-protocol differences in ROM gains. (4) Conclusions: ST and stretching were not different in their effects on ROM, but the studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of design, protocols and populations, and so further research is warranted. However, the qualitative effects of all the studies were quite homogeneous.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Afonso

Ramírez‐Campillo

Moscão³

et al. 2021

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12 Current data demonstrates the beneficial effects of resistance training on cardiorespiratory capacity in several cohorts such as critical illness polyneuropathy patients 13 or in elderly people. 14 Cognitive abilities and emotional state: There exist little data about the impact of resistance training on cognition and emotional state in stroke patients up to now. Most previous trials did not regard the potential of 'physical exercises' on 'nonphysical outcomes'.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 This decreases independence in daily living activities and evocates secondary stroke-related complications. 12 Existing studies have already demonstrated that resistance training induces cardiorespiratory benefits in neurological 13 as well as non-neurological 14 cohorts. This type of training also may impact cognition and emotional wellbeing because physical activities support cognitive recovery after stroke 15 and relieve symptoms of depression.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Resistance training in stroke rehabilitation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Veldema

Jansen

2020

Clin Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effects of resistance training in supporting the recovery in stroke patients. Data sources: PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the PEDro databases were reviewed up to 30 April 2020. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials were included, who compared: (i) resistance training with no intervention, (ii) resistance training with other interventions and (iii) different resistance training protocols in stroke rehabilitation. Results: Overall 30 trials ( n = 1051) were enrolled. The parameters evaluated were: (1) gait, (2) muscular force and motor function, (3) mobility, balance and postural control, (4) health related quality of life, independence and reintegration, (5) spasticity and hypertonia, (6) cardiorespiratory fitness, (7) cognitive abilities and emotional state and (8) other health-relevant physiological indicators. The data indicates that: (i) resistance training is beneficial for the majority of parameters observed, (ii) resistance training is superior to other therapies on muscular force and motor function of lower and upper limbs, health related quality of life, independence and reintegration and other health-relevant physiological indicators, not significantly different from other therapies on walking ability, mobility balance and postural control and spasticity and hypertonia, and inferior to ergometer training on cardiorespiratory fitness and (iii) the type of resistance training protocol significantly impacts its effect; leg press is more efficient than knee extension and high intensity training is superior than low intensity training. Conclusion: Current data indicates that resistance training may be beneficial in supporting the recovery of stroke patients. However, the current evidence is insufficient for evidence-based rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…One article did not have the required intervention, [53] and two did not have the needed comparators. [54,55] In one article, the ST and stretching groups performed a 20-30 minutes warm-up following an unspecified protocol. [56] In another, the intervention and comparator were unsupervised [57], and in one the stretching group was unsupervised [58].…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength training is as effective as stretching for improving range of motion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Afonso¹,

Ramírez‐Campillo²,

Moscão³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Range of motion (ROM) is an important feature of sports performance and health. Stretching is usually prescribed to improve promote ROM gains, but evidence has suggested that strength training (ST) also improves ROM. However, it is unclear if its efficacy is comparable to stretching. Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of ST and stretching on ROM. Protocol: INPLASY: 10.37766/inplasy2020.9.0098. Data sources: Cochrane Library, EBSCO, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science were consulted in early October 2020, followed by search within reference lists and consultation of four experts. No constraints on language or year. Eligibility criteria (PICOS): (P) humans of any sex, age, health or training status; (I) ST interventions; (C) stretching interventions (O) ROM; (S) supervised RCTs. Data extraction and synthesis: Independently conducted by multiple authors. Quality of evidence assessed using GRADE; risk-of-bias assessed with RoB 2. Results: Eleven articles (n = 452 participants) were included. Pooled data showed no differences between ST and stretching on ROM (ES = -022; 95% CI = -055 to 012; p = 0206). Sub-group analyses based on RoB, active vs. passive ROM, and specific movement-per-joint analyses for hip flexion and knee extension showed no between-protocol differences in ROM gains. Conclusion: ST and stretching were not different in improving ROM, regardless of the diversity of protocols and populations. Barring specific contra-indications, people who do not respond well or do not adhere to stretching protocols can change to ST programs, and vice-versa.

show abstract

Comparison between functional and traditional training exercises on joint mobility, determinants of walking and muscle strength in older women

Cited by 13 publications

References 36 publications

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Resistance training in stroke rehabilitation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Strength training is as effective as stretching for improving range of motion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About