SarcopeniaNCT05580913
Auto-regulated Resistance-training for Older Adults
A study testing Resistance training in people with Sarcopenia, run by University of Saskatchewan at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This research study is comparing the effect of traditional standardized, subjective auto-regulated, and objective auto-regulated resistance training on physiological adaptations and performance measures in adults aged 50 years or older. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Sarcopenia
- What is being tested?
- Resistance training
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 36 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- 15 Oct 2022to 31 Aug 2023
- 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 50 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Males and females 50 years of age or greater
Who cannot join
- Inability to safely perform squat and bench press exercises as determined by the Get Active Questionnaire
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Auto-regulated Resistance-training for Improving Strength in Older Adults
This research study is comparing the effect of traditional standardized, subjective auto-regulated, and objective auto-regulated resistance training on physiological adaptations and performance measures in adults aged 50 years or older. Traditional standardized resistance training involves prescribing resistance training as a percentage of an individual's one-repetition maximum (i.e., the maximal weight they can lift one time). Auto-regulated resistance training involves adjusting resistance training based on an individual's performance during the session. Subjective auto-regulation involves the resistance trainee providing a subjective rating of perceived exertion based on repetitions in reserve (on a scale from 1 - 10) to adjust the resistance training prescription. A rating of perceived exertion of 10 would mean that the resistance trainee believes that they have provided maximal effort and believes that they could not have performed an additional repetition during the set nor increased the load. Objective auto-regulation involves adjusting the resistance training prescription from a linear position transducer (a device that has a string that attaches to the barbell and provides a velocity value on each repetition). A slower velocity value means a higher perceived exertion and load used, whereas a faster velocity value means a lower perceived exertion and load used.
Read the detailed description
Auto-regulated resistance training has emerged as a resistance training paradigm to individualize programming; however, it remains to be elucidated whether auto-regulated resistance training provides a greater benefit than traditional standardized resistance training on physiological adaptations and performance outcomes in older adults. Traditional resistance training involves prescription of intensity as a percentage of the maximal amount of weight an individual can lift (for example, a resistance of 70% of maximal strength is a weight equal to 70% of the maximal weight a person can lift one time. An individual with this prescription would lift this weight for a number of repetitions to failure; i.e. usually 8-10 repetitions). Auto-regulation can be done two ways: "Subjective" auto-regulation involves lifting a weight for a number of repetitions until the individual reaches a certain "rating of perceived exertion". The rating of perceived exertion is on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the most difficult or maximal exertion. For example, if one was prescribed a rating of perceived exertion of 8 they would lift a weight for a given number of repetitions until they believed they were at an 8/10 on the scale and had 2 repetitions left before failing. "Objective" auto-regulation involves lifting a weight for a given number of repetitions until a predetermined velocity of lifting is reached. For example, once someone starts to get fatigued while performing repeated lifting, the velocity of lifting will slow down. Once they have reached a critical slow velocity, the exercise would be stopped. There is some evidence that auto-regulation improves muscular strength to a greater extent than traditional resistance training in healthy populations.
The research design is a prospective randomized trial comparing three training protocols in 30 participants. Participants will be randomized into one of three groups (n = 10 each), with matching on baseline strength: traditional standardized, subjective auto-regulated, and objective auto-regulated. Training will be twice per week for 12 weeks. Measures include strength assessments, muscle size, and performance of functional tasks.
- Conditions
- Sarcopenia
- Being tested
- Resistance training
- Medical subject headings
- Sarcopenia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Resistance trainingBehavioural
12 weeks of resistance-training performed two times per week
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Subjective auto-regulation training | Experimental | Participants complete their resistance-training sets to termination based on rating of perceived exertion Receives: Behavioral: Resistance training |
| Objective auto-regulation training | Experimental | Participants complete their resistance-training sets to termination based on reaching a critical slow velocity Receives: Behavioral: Resistance training |
| Traditional standardized training | Active comparator | Participants complete their resistance-training sets by lifting a prescribed percentage of their estimated one-repetition maximum (as determined from baseline four-repetition maximum strength testing) Receives: Behavioral: Resistance training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change from baseline in bench press strength
Measured: baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in squat strength
Measured: baseline, 12 weeks
Secondary outcomes (6)
Change from baseline in muscle thickness
Muscle thickness will be determined for the quadriceps, hamstrings, triceps, and pectoralis (males only)
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in knee extension strength
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline for time to sit and stand from a chair five times
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to complete the "timed up and go" (TUG) test
Time to stand from a chair, walk around a cone (3 meters) and sit back down in the chair
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to climb 10 stairs
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to walk 10 meters
Measured: Baseline, 12 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Oct 2022
- Study start15 Oct 2022
- Primary completion31 Aug 2023
- Study completion31 Aug 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for SarcopeniaStudies 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
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Saskatchewan
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Phil Chilibeck, University of Saskatchewan
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05580913
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2972
- Status last verified
- May 2024
- First submitted
- 11 Oct 2022
- Last updated
- 29 May 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 May 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Auto-regulated Resistance-training for Improving Strength in Older Adults
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05580913
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2972
- Conditions
- Sarcopenia
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of SaskatchewanUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Oct 2022 (actual)
- 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.
This research study is comparing the effect of traditional standardized, subjective auto-regulated, and objective auto-regulated resistance training on physiological adaptations and performance measures in adults aged 50 years or older. Traditional standardized resistance training involves prescribing resistance training as a percentage of an individual's one-repetition maximum (i.e., the maximal weight they can lift one time). Auto-regulated resistance training involves adjusting resistance training based on an individual's performance during the session. Subjective auto-regulation involves the resistance trainee providing a subjective rating of perceived exertion based on repetitions in reserve (on a scale from 1 - 10) to adjust the resistance training prescription. A rating of perceived exertion of 10 would mean that the resistance trainee believes that they have provided maximal effort and believes that they could not have performed an additional repetition during the set nor increased the load. Objective auto-regulation involves adjusting the resistance training prescription from a linear position transducer (a device that has a string that attaches to the barbell and provides a velocity value on each repetition). A slower velocity value means a higher perceived exertion and load used, whereas a faster velocity value means a lower perceived exertion and load used.
Detailed description
Auto-regulated resistance training has emerged as a resistance training paradigm to individualize programming; however, it remains to be elucidated whether auto-regulated resistance training provides a greater benefit than traditional standardized resistance training on physiological adaptations and performance outcomes in older adults. Traditional resistance training involves prescription of intensity as a percentage of the maximal amount of weight an individual can lift (for example, a resistance of 70% of maximal strength is a weight equal to 70% of the maximal weight a person can lift one time. An individual with this prescription would lift this weight for a number of repetitions to failure; i.e. usually 8-10 repetitions). Auto-regulation can be done two ways: "Subjective" auto-regulation involves lifting a weight for a number of repetitions until the individual reaches a certain "rating of perceived exertion". The rating of perceived exertion is on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the most difficult or maximal exertion. For example, if one was prescribed a rating of perceived exertion of 8 they would lift a weight for a given number of repetitions until they believed they were at an 8/10 on the scale and had 2 repetitions left before failing. "Objective" auto-regulation involves lifting a weight for a given number of repetitions until a predetermined velocity of lifting is reached. For example, once someone starts to get fatigued while performing repeated lifting, the velocity of lifting will slow down. Once they have reached a critical slow velocity, the exercise would be stopped. There is some evidence that auto-regulation improves muscular strength to a greater extent than traditional resistance training in healthy populations.
The research design is a prospective randomized trial comparing three training protocols in 30 participants. Participants will be randomized into one of three groups (n = 10 each), with matching on baseline strength: traditional standardized, subjective auto-regulated, and objective auto-regulated. Training will be twice per week for 12 weeks. Measures include strength assessments, muscle size, and performance of functional tasks.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Subjective auto-regulation training | Experimental | Behavioral: Resistance trainingParticipants complete their resistance-training sets to termination based on rating of perceived exertion |
| Objective auto-regulation training | Experimental | Behavioral: Resistance trainingParticipants complete their resistance-training sets to termination based on reaching a critical slow velocity |
| Traditional standardized training | Active comparator | Behavioral: Resistance trainingParticipants complete their resistance-training sets by lifting a prescribed percentage of their estimated one-repetition maximum (as determined from baseline four-repetition maximum strength testing) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Males and females 50 years of age or greater
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Inability to safely perform squat and bench press exercises as determined by the Get Active Questionnaire
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance training12 weeks of resistance-training performed two times per week | Behavioural | Objective auto-regulation training, Subjective auto-regulation training, Traditional standardized training |
Primary outcome
Change from baseline in bench press strength
Time frame: baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in squat strength
Time frame: baseline, 12 weeks
6 secondary outcomes
Change from baseline in muscle thickness
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in knee extension strength
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline for time to sit and stand from a chair five times
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to complete the "timed up and go" (TUG) test
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to climb 10 stairs
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
Change from baseline in time to walk 10 meters
Time frame: Baseline, 12 weeks
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 29 May 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Sarcopenia
RecruitingObservational study
Myopenia and Mechanisms of Chemotherapy Toxicity in Older Adults With Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer, Sarcopenia
Active, not recruitingObservational study
The Impact of Osteosarcopenia on Falls, Kinesiophobia, and Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women
Osteosarcopenia, Sarcopenia
Not yet recruiting
Eccentric Exercise in Community-dwelling Older Adults
Ageing Well
RecruitingObservational study
Comparison of Individuals With Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia and Healthy Controls
Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia (PCD)
Active, not recruiting
Online Prehabilitation for Patients Awaiting Liver Transplantation
Cirrhosis, Liver, Liver Transplant Surgery
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Resistance training in people with Sarcopenia, run by University of Saskatchewan at 1 site in Canada.
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 29 May 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
Change from baseline in bench press strength (time frame: baseline, 12 weeks). The study lists 2 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 29 May 2024.