You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PEDro systematic review update
Dose–response relationship of resistance training in older adults: a meta-analysis
  1. Fairhall Nicola1,2,
  2. Sherrington Catherine1
  1. 1Centre for Evidence-Based Physiotherapy, The George Institute for Global Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  2. 2Rehabilitation Studies Unit, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Nicola Fairhall, The George Institute for Global Health, PO Box M201, Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia; nfairhall{at}georgeinstitute.org.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2010.083246

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    1. Steib SD,
    2. Schoene D,
    3. Pfeifer K
    . Dose–Response Relationship of Resistance Training in Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010;42:902–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Background

    Age-related decline in strength is associated with loss of mobility, functioning and independence. It is clear that resistance training benefits older people by increasing strength and improving some aspects of functioning.1 However, the optimal dose and type of resistance training is uncertain. While previous reviews have compared intervention and control resistance training programmes, the results of studies directly comparing different doses or types of resistance training have not been combined.

    Aims

    This systematic review by Steib and colleagues aimed to synthesise the best available evidence comparing the effectiveness of different types, intensities, frequencies, volumes and durations of resistance training on strength and functioning in older adults.

    Searches and inclusion criteria

    Three databases (Medline, the Cochrane Library and PEDro) were searched up until August 2008 and reference lists of obtained studies were screened. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials in adults with a mean age of 65 years or older that compared …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.