↓ Skip to main content

How much will older adults exercise? A feasibility study of aerobic training combined with resistance training

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How much will older adults exercise? A feasibility study of aerobic training combined with resistance training
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40814-016-0116-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryan S. Falck, Jennifer C. Davis, Elizabeth Milosevic, Teresa Liu-Ambrose

Abstract

Both aerobic training (AT) and resistance training (RT) have multidimensional health benefits for older adults including increased life expectancy and decreased risk of chronic diseases. However, the volume (i.e., frequency*time) of AT combined with RT in which untrained older adults can feasibly and safely participate remains unclear. Thus, our primary objective was to investigate the feasibility and safety of a high-volume exercise program consisting of twice weekly AT combined with twice weekly RT (i.e., four times weekly exercise) on a group of untrained older adults. In addition, we investigated the effects of the program on physical function, aerobic capacity, muscular strength, and explored factors related to participant adherence. We recruited eight inactive older adults (65+ years) to participate in a 6-week, single-group pre-post exercise intervention, consisting of 2 days/week of AT plus 2 days/week of progressive RT for 6 weeks. We recorded program attendance and monitored for adverse events during the course of the program. Participants were tested at both baseline and follow-up on the following: (1) physical function (i.e., timed-up-and-go test (TUG) and short physical performance battery (SPPB)), (2) aerobic capacity (VO2max) using the modified Bruce protocol; and (3) muscular strength on the leg press and lat pull-down. Post intervention, we performed qualitative semi-structured interviews of all participants regarding their experiences in the exercise program. We used these responses to examine themes that may affect continued program adherence to a high-volume exercise program. We recorded an average attendance rate of 83.3% with the lowest attendance for one session being five out of eight participants; no significant adverse events occurred. Significant improvements were observed for SPPB score (1.6; 95% CI: [0.3, 2.9]), VO2max (8.8 ml/kg/min; 95% CI: [2.8, 14.8]), and lat pull-down strength (11.8 lbs; 95% CI: [3.3, 20.2]). Qualitative results revealed two themes that promote older adults' adherence: (1) convenience of the program and (2) the social benefits of exercise. Our findings suggest untrained older adults can be successful at completing twice weekly AT combined with twice weekly progressive RT; however, these exercise programs should be group-based in order to maintain high adherence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 26 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 15 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Unspecified 4 4%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 31 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2017.
All research outputs
#13,018,824
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#542
of 1,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,468
of 418,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.