Novel Resistance Training Approach to Monitoring the Volume in Older Adults: The Role of Movement Velocity

Marques, Diogo Luís; Neiva, Henrique P.; Marinho, Daniel A.; Marques, Mário C.

doi:10.3390/ijerph17207557

Cited by 12 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(103 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The coaches and physical trainers can choose more suitable training programs according to the characteristics of athletes and the training goals of customers. The evidence so far confirms that VBRT could be used for people who are not suitable for PBT load setting (such as adolescents 39 and the elderly 60 61 ) . VBRT may be the preferred option for those people who have a time limit, aim to maintain power output, have other training arrangements, still in the season, use equipment for valuable information to pursue greater strength and power adaptation, or focus on improving sports ability (strength and explosive force).…”

Section: Practical Applicationmentioning

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Velocity and Percentage-based Training on Maximal Strength: Meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose was to analyze the comparison of velocity-based resistance training and one-repetition maximum (%1RM) percentage-based training in maximal strength improvement by meta-analyzing and to find the reasons for the controversial findings of different studies. Ten studies were included in the systematic review and seven were subjected to meta-analysis. A total of 139 subjects were selected from the included articles after exclusion, including athletes of different specialties (N=93) and non-athletes mainly from fitness groups (N=46). The overall effect size was SMD=0.26 (95%CL 0.03 to 0.49, P=0.03, I²=0). As for the comparison of the analysis of different intervention objects as subgroups, the effect size of athletes as the subgroup was 0.35 (95%CI 0.06 to 0.64, p=0.02, I²=0), indicating that in the RCT with athletes as the intervention target, the effect of VBRT in improving the maximal strength was significantly different from that of PBT. Velocity-based resistance training might be more effective than percentage-based training in maximal strength improvement, in which velocity-based resistance training is more suitable for athletes in season, while percentage-based training is more suitable for the general sports population. More high-quality researches should deal with the effect of other athletic performance with velocity-based resistance training in the future.

show abstract

Section: Practical Applicationmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…All rights reserved. The evidence so far confirms that VBRT could be used for people who are not suitable for PBT load setting (such as adolescents [39] and the elderly [60,61] ) . VBRT may be the preferred option for those people who and hip thrust, it may be more appropriate to adopt the VBRT method.…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 75%

Comparison of Velocity and Percentage-based Training on Maximal Strength: Meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The participants held the ball on their chest and threw it as far as possible while seated on a chair (0.49 m) (Marques et al, 2020). They performed three trials with 1 and 3 kg balls, interspersed with 1-min rest.…”

Section: Seated Medicine Ball Throwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The inter-set rest was 3 min for three repetitions and 5 min for two repetitions (Marques et al, 2021). Using the procedures described elsewhere (Marques et al, 2020), we coupled a linear velocity transducer (T-Force System, Ergotech, Spain) to the leg press and chest press machines to calculate each repetition's mean and peak power. We selected the maximal mean and peak power values attained with each weight for analysis.…”

Section: Progressive Loading Test In the Leg Press And Chest Pressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Load-power relationship in older adults: The influence of maximal mean and peak power values and their associations with lower and upper-limb functional capacity

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying the relative loads (%1RM) that maximize power output (Pmax-load) in resistance exercises can help design interventions to optimize muscle power in older adults. Moreover, examining the maximal mean power (MPmax) and peak power (PPmax) values (Watts) would allow an understanding of their differences and associations with functionality markers in older adults. Therefore, this research aimed to 1) analyze the load-mean and peak power relationships in the leg press and chest press in older adults, 2) examine the differences between mean Pmax-load (MPmax-load) and peak Pmax-load (PPmax-load) within resistance exercises, 3) identify the differences between resistance exercises in MPmax-load and PPmax-load, and 4) explore the associations between MPmax and PPmax in the leg press and chest press with functional capacity indicators. Thirty-two older adults (79.3 ± 7.3 years) performed the following tests: medicine ball throw (MBT), five-repetition sit-to-stand (STS), 10-m walking (10 W), and a progressive loading test in the leg press and chest press. Quadratic regressions analyzed 1) the load-mean and peak power relationships and identified the MPmax-load, MPmax, PPmax-load, and PPmax in both exercises, 2) the associations between MPmax and PPmax in the chest press with MBT, and 3) the associations between MPmax and PPmax in the leg press with STSpower and 10Wvelocity. In the leg press, the MPmax-load was ∼66% 1RM, and the PPmax-load was ∼62% 1RM, both for women and men (p > 0.05). In the chest press, the MPmax-load was ∼62% 1RM, and the PPmax-load was ∼56% 1RM, both for women and men (p > 0.05). There were differences between MPmax-load and PPmax-load within exercises (p < 0.01) and differences between exercises in MPmax-load and PPmax-load (p < 0.01). The MPmax and PPmax in the chest press explained ∼48% and ∼52% of the MBT-1 kg and MBT-3 kg variance, respectively. In the leg press, the MPmax and PPmax explained ∼59% of STSpower variance; however, both variables could not explain the 10Wvelocity performance (r2 ∼ 0.02). This study shows that the Pmax-load is similar between sexes, is resistance exercise-specific, and varies within exercises depending on the mechanical power variable used in older adults. Furthermore, this research demonstrates the influence of the MBT as an upper-limb power marker in older adults.

show abstract

“…During the sit-to-stand test, researchers and clinicians commonly measure the time spent to perform a fixed number of repetitions or the number of repetitions performed during a specific time [ 4 , 14 ]. Commonly, the evaluators use a chronometer to measure the time during the sit-to-stand test [ 27 , 28 ]. Despite its low cost and ease of use, chronometers present some limitations, mainly associated with human error (e.g., reaction time delay and position judgment) [ 29 , 30 , 31 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Experimental Study on the Validity and Reliability of a Smartphone Application to Acquire Temporal Variables during the Single Sit-to-Stand Test with Older Adults

Marques

Neiva

Pires

et al. 2021

Sensors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smartphone sensors have often been proposed as pervasive measurement systems to assess mobility in older adults due to their ease of use and low-cost. This study analyzes a smartphone-based application’s validity and reliability to quantify temporal variables during the single sit-to-stand test with institutionalized older adults. Forty older adults (20 women and 20 men; 78.9 ± 8.6 years) volunteered to participate in this study. All participants performed the single sit-to-stand test. Each sit-to-stand repetition was performed after an acoustic signal was emitted by the smartphone app. All data were acquired simultaneously with a smartphone and a digital video camera. The measured temporal variables were stand-up time and total time. The relative reliability and systematic bias inter-device were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. In contrast, absolute reliability was assessed using the standard error of measurement and coefficient of variation (CV). Inter-device concurrent validity was assessed through correlation analysis. The absolute percent error (APE) and the accuracy were also calculated. The results showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.92–0.97; CV = 1.85–3.03) and very strong relationships inter-devices for the stand-up time (r = 0.94) and the total time (r = 0.98). The APE was lower than 6%, and the accuracy was higher than 94%. Based on our data, the findings suggest that the smartphone application is valid and reliable to collect the stand-up time and total time during the single sit-to-stand test with older adults.

show abstract

Novel Resistance Training Approach to Monitoring the Volume in Older Adults: The Role of Movement Velocity

Cited by 12 publications

References 47 publications

Comparison of Velocity and Percentage-based Training on Maximal Strength: Meta-analysis

Comparison of Velocity and Percentage-based Training on Maximal Strength: Meta-analysis

Load-power relationship in older adults: The influence of maximal mean and peak power values and their associations with lower and upper-limb functional capacity

An Experimental Study on the Validity and Reliability of a Smartphone Application to Acquire Temporal Variables during the Single Sit-to-Stand Test with Older Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About