Effects of vibration and exercise training on bone mineral density and muscle strength in post‐menopausal women

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a specific vibration programme with those of combined aerobic and resistance exercise training on bone mineral density (BMD), body composition, and muscular strength in post-menopausal women, over a period of 6 months. Thirty-two healthy, inactive post-menopausal women aged 46Á62 years were divided into exercise (n 0 10), vibration (n 0 13), and control (n 0 9) groups. The exercise group participated in a supervised programme of strength training at 70% of one-repetition maximum (1-RM) 2 days a week, and aerobic exercise at 70Á85% of maximum heart rate one day a week. The vibration group performed vibration training 3 days a week (9 sets )45Á80 s per session, 35Á40 Hz, peak-to-peak amplitude of vertical vibration 0 1.5 mm) on a vibration platform (NemesTM LCB, Bosco System). The BMD of the lumbar spine (L2ÁL4) was assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and muscle strength with the 1-RM method at baseline and after 6 months of intervention. The BMD of L2ÁL4 increased in the exercise group (P B 0.05), remained steady in the vibration group, and decreased in the control group (P B 0.05). Muscular strength of leg-extension and leg-curl exercise improved by 28% and 25.5% (P B 0.01) in the exercise group and by 13% (P B 0.01) and 20.5% (P B 0.001) in the vibration group, respectively. The results indicate that conventional training contributed to the increase in BMD of L2ÁL4, while the vibration programme helped to maintain BMD in post-menopausal women. Both training programmes were efficient in improving muscle strength.

Whole Body Vibration Treatments in Postmenopausal Women Can Improve Bone Mineral Density: Results of a Stimulus Focussed Meta-Analysis

“…The analysed studies include stimuli varying from 0.3 g [22] to 18 g [28]. Our analyses showed that if the magnitude delivered was greater than 3 g [24, 28–32] there was a significant effect of treatment (0.013 g/cm 2 , p = 0.005, WMD = 1.5%) with respect to the relevant control groups (Fig 3). BMD decline can be potentially reversed (RE = 67%).…”

“…The analyses showed a significant overall improvement (0.020 g/cm 2 , p<0.001, WMD = 2.5%) in subjects treated with side-alternating platforms (Fig 5) [21, 22, 24, 28, 30, 32]. BMD values were higher than the baseline (RE = 73%).…”

“…No differences in BMD values were found with respect to either of the control groups (placebo or exercise training). Conversely, when WBV was not associated with simultaneous exercises [21, 22, 24, 28, 30, 31], a difference of 0.035 g/cm 2 (p<0.001, WMD = 4.5%) was observed (Fig 6A). BMD values were higher than the baseline (RE = 42%).…”

“…A further 189 papers were excluded due to non-eligible population, absence of control group, and use of medications (Fig 2). Nine studies met the eligibility criteria [21–24, 28–32], three were CCTs [21, 23, 28] while the others were RCTs. The number of included trials was insufficient to shape a funnel plot or to use more advanced regression-based estimations; publication bias could not be properly assessed.…”

“…The correlation coefficient used (0.98) was estimated by averaging r values obtained for different anatomical sites (FN, TR, LS, TH and WB) from the selected studies. Statistical manipulations were also used to convert confidence intervals (CI) [21] or standard errors [22–24] to SDs.…”