Purpose This study investigated the effects of a 16-week high-speed resistance training (HSRT) program on physical and cognitive function in independent older adults. Methods Seventy-nine participants were assigned to an intervention group (IG, N= 40, 68.50 ± 3.54 years) or a control group (CG, N = 39, 72.08 ± 5.89 years). The IG completed 60–70 min of supervised HSRT three times weekly for 16 weeks. All concentric actions were continuously monitored with a BEAST™ sensor. Physical function was evaluated by five tests: chair‐stand, timed up and go (TUG), seated medicine ball throw (SMBT), six-minute walk (6MWT), and handgrip strength. General cognitive function was assessed with the mini-mental state examination (MMSE). Results The intervention could induce significant improvements in favor of the IG (p < 0.001) for chair-stand (<InlineEquation ID="IEq1"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.736), TUG test (<InlineEquation ID="IEq2"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.635), SMBT (<InlineEquation ID="IEq3"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.331), 6MWT (<InlineEquation ID="IEq4"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.386), and handgrip strength test for dominant ( <InlineEquation ID="IEq5"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.448) and non-dominant side( <InlineEquation ID="IEq6"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.388), as well as in general cognitive function (MMSE, p = 0.001, <InlineEquation ID="IEq7"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="11332_2025_1419_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="22" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="24" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">$\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msubsup> <mi>η</mi> <mrow> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mspace width="0.277778em" /> <mtext>p</mtext> </mrow> <mn>2</mn> </msubsup> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> = 0.146). Conclusions The 16-week HSRT program led to substantial enhancements in both physical and cognitive function. Interestingly, the HSRT program, tailored to general velocity zones, proved to be a safe and motivational approach to physical exercise within this population.

Effects of a 16-week high-speed resistance training program on physical and cognitive function in community-dwelling independent older adults: a clinical trial

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2025年5月11日

查看全文

Alexandre Duarte Martins,
Nuno Batalha,
Orlando Fernandes,
Bruno Gonçalves,
Rafael Oliveira,
Joao Paulo Brito

摘要

Purpose

This study investigated the effects of a 16-week high-speed resistance training (HSRT) program on physical and cognitive function in independent older adults.

Methods

Seventy-nine participants were assigned to an intervention group (IG, N= 40, 68.50 ± 3.54 years) or a control group (CG, N = 39, 72.08 ± 5.89 years). The IG completed 60–70 min of supervised HSRT three times weekly for 16 weeks. All concentric actions were continuously monitored with a BEAST^™ sensor. Physical function was evaluated by five tests: chair‐stand, timed up and go (TUG), seated medicine ball throw (SMBT), six-minute walk (6MWT), and handgrip strength. General cognitive function was assessed with the mini-mental state examination (MMSE).

Results

The intervention could induce significant improvements in favor of the IG (p < 0.001) for chair-stand ( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.736), TUG test ( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.635), SMBT ( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.331), 6MWT ( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.386), and handgrip strength test for dominant ( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.448) and non-dominant side( $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.388), as well as in general cognitive function (MMSE, p = 0.001, $\eta^{2}_{{\;\;{\text{p}}}}$ $η_{p}^{2}$ = 0.146).

Conclusions

The 16-week HSRT program led to substantial enhancements in both physical and cognitive function. Interestingly, the HSRT program, tailored to general velocity zones, proved to be a safe and motivational approach to physical exercise within this population.