HealthyNCT02852668
Power Training Versus Strength Training in the Elderly
A study testing Power Training and Strength Training in people with Healthy, run by University of Sao Paulo.
Trial summary
The inexorable decline in motor skills during aging provides the investigators with an elderly population with various functional limitations. Among these, the ability to walk, being associated with the risk of falling has been studied by several authors. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 to 75 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Power Training and Strength Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jun 2011to Jan 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 65 to 75 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- sedentary women with no physical mobility limitations
Who cannot join
- attending less than 75% of the intervention sessions and not attending the final evaluation
About this study
Official title: Biomechanical Gait Indicators of Elderly Women in Response to Strength Training or Power Training
The inexorable decline in motor skills during aging provides the investigators with an elderly population with various functional limitations. Among these, the ability to walk, being associated with the risk of falling has been studied by several authors. The adoption of strength and power training as an intervention strategy to reduce the negative effects arising from the physiological or pathological process of aging has been widely discussed in these studies. However, the effects of these interventions on biomechanical gait indicators have not been fully debated yet. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of these two training protocols on functional capacities and biomechanical gait parameters of elderly women.
Read the detailed description
Three female groups, homogenized by age, body mass index and physical activity level, were formed: the control group (GC: n=8, 69±4 years old), the strength training group (GF: n=6, 67±4 years old) and the power training group (GP, n=7, 68±4 years old). No extra activity was induced to GC's routine. Meanwhile, GF and GP underwent 12 weeks of strength and power training, respectively, with three weekly sessions. While GF performed the exercises with moderate speed (70-90% of 1RM), the GP executed them in fast speed (40-60% of 1RM). A kinematic and electromyographic gait evaluation, as well as balance and functional capacity evaluations, were conducted prior and after the intervention period.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Power Training, Strength Training
- Keywords
- elderly, strength training, power training, functional capacity, gait biomechanics
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Power TrainingOther
This experimental groups underwent an intervention period of power training
Strength TrainingOther
This experimental groups underwent an intervention period of strength training
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Power Training Group | Experimental | Physical exercises. Strength training performed quickly Receives: Other: Power Training |
| Strength Training Group | Experimental | Physical exercises. Strength training performed in moderate speed Receives: Other: Strength Training |
| Control Group | No intervention | This group maintained the same physical activity level during the intervention period. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Gait kinematics
toe clearance: minimum vertical distance of the forefoot and the ground during swing phase
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Timed up and go test
time needed to get up from a seated position walk 3 meters and walk back to the chair
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Muscle power
knee extensors muscle power
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
electromyography gait analysis
Knee extensors and flexors muscles co-contraction during the gait cycle
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Aug 2016 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2011
- Primary completionDec 2011
- Study completionJan 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Sao Paulo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, João Pedro Pinho, University of Sao Paulo
- Investigators
- Alberto C Amadio, PhD, Study director, University of Sao Paulo
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02852668
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PowerElderly
- Status last verified
- Jul 2016
- First submitted
- 27 Jul 2016
- Last updated
- 2 Aug 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No: Only group data will be available. These are to be published in scientific papers.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Aug 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Biomechanical Gait Indicators of Elderly Women in Response to Strength Training or Power Training
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02852668
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PowerElderly
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- elderly, strength training, power training, functional capacity, gait biomechanics
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Sao PauloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2011
- Primary completion
- Dec 2011 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Aug 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The inexorable decline in motor skills during aging provides the investigators with an elderly population with various functional limitations. Among these, the ability to walk, being associated with the risk of falling has been studied by several authors. The adoption of strength and power training as an intervention strategy to reduce the negative effects arising from the physiological or pathological process of aging has been widely discussed in these studies. However, the effects of these interventions on biomechanical gait indicators have not been fully debated yet. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of these two training protocols on functional capacities and biomechanical gait parameters of elderly women.
Detailed description
Three female groups, homogenized by age, body mass index and physical activity level, were formed: the control group (GC: n=8, 69±4 years old), the strength training group (GF: n=6, 67±4 years old) and the power training group (GP, n=7, 68±4 years old). No extra activity was induced to GC's routine. Meanwhile, GF and GP underwent 12 weeks of strength and power training, respectively, with three weekly sessions. While GF performed the exercises with moderate speed (70-90% of 1RM), the GP executed them in fast speed (40-60% of 1RM). A kinematic and electromyographic gait evaluation, as well as balance and functional capacity evaluations, were conducted prior and after the intervention period.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Power Training Group | Experimental | Other: Power TrainingPhysical exercises. Strength training performed quickly |
| Strength Training Group | Experimental | Other: Strength TrainingPhysical exercises. Strength training performed in moderate speed |
| Control Group | No intervention | –This group maintained the same physical activity level during the intervention period. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 to 75 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- sedentary women with no physical mobility limitations
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- attending less than 75% of the intervention sessions and not attending the final evaluation
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Power TrainingThis experimental groups underwent an intervention period of power training | Other | Power Training Group |
| Strength TrainingThis experimental groups underwent an intervention period of strength training | Other | Strength Training Group |
Primary outcome
Gait kinematics
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
toe clearance: minimum vertical distance of the forefoot and the ground during swing phase
Timed up and go test
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
time needed to get up from a seated position walk 3 meters and walk back to the chair
Muscle power
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
knee extensors muscle power
electromyography gait analysis
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Knee extensors and flexors muscles co-contraction during the gait cycle
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Aug 2016.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Only group data will be available. These are to be published in scientific papers.
Related trials for Healthy
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Human Subarachnoid Space Using Intrathecal Gadolinium Contrast
Healthy Volunteers
RecruitingObservational study
Survey to Determine Incarcerated Persons' Views on Surrogate Decision Making
Healthy Volunteers
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study to Learn How Different Amounts of the Study Medicine Called PF-07985631 Are Tolerated and Act in the Body of Healthy Adults
Healthy
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Collection and Distribution of Blood Components From Healthy Donors for In Vitro Research Use
Blood Donors, Apheresis
Recruiting
Metabolic Impact of VLCPUFA-Rich Fish Oil: A Clinical Study on Omega-3 Index Enhancement in Healthy Individuals
Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Fish Oils
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Alberto C Amadio, PhD study director
University of Sao Paulo
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Power Training and Strength Training in people with Healthy, run by University of Sao Paulo.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Aug 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Gait kinematics (time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Aug 2016.