Muscle StrengthBIO-STRNCT06727695
Effect of BioStrength Training on Muscle Strength and Satisfaction in Adults Aged 30-65
A study testing BioStrength Intervention and Conventional training in people with Muscle Strength and Body Composition, run by University of Graz at 1 site in Austria.
Trial summary
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Technogyms BioStrength equipment compared to traditional strength training equipment over a 12-week intervention period. The study will determine whether BioStrength machines produce more effective results in terms of muscle strength and body composition. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 30 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Muscle Strength, Body Composition, Physical Fitness
- What is being tested?
- BioStrength Intervention and Conventional training
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustria
- Study dates
- 8 Oct 2024to 1 Oct 2025
- 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 30 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- • Age between 30 and 65 years
- Healthy individuals without significant medical conditions
- Less than 6 months of prior strength training experience
- Willing and able to participate in a 12-week training program
- Capable of performing strength training exercises such as leg press and chest press
- Able to provide written informed consent
Who cannot join
- • History of coronary heart disease
- History of stroke
- Need for changes in antihypertensive treatment within 3 months prior to study start
- Arthritis
- Pregnancy or less than three months postpartum
- Pain and movement restrictions
- Use of medications that affect muscle strength or performance (e.g., anabolic steroids, beta-2 agonists, glucocorticoids, statins, benzodiazepines, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin-II receptor blockers, diuretics)
- Any medical condition preventing participation in planned endurance and strength training
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Austria1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
CF Leibnitz
Leibnitz, Styria, Styria, 8430
Martin Atia, 06642524153, m.atia@edu.uni-graz.at
About this study
Official title: A Comparative Study of Training Effectiveness: Technogyms Biostrength Devices Vs. Conventional Strength Training Devices: a Randomized Controlled Trial
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Technogyms BioStrength equipment compared to traditional strength training equipment over a 12-week intervention period. The study will determine whether BioStrength machines produce more effective results in terms of muscle strength and body composition. Participants will be allocated to either the BioStrength group or the traditional training group using a minimisation technique to balance important prognostic factors such as handgrip strength, age and gender between the groups. Key measurements include maximum strength tests (10RM) for leg press and chest press, handgrip strength using a dynamometer, and body composition using bioimpedance analysis. Circumference measurements will also be taken. The study will assess whether BioStrength equipment provides superior results in muscle strength, body composition and training efficiency compared to conventional gym equipment.
Read the detailed description
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Technogyms BioStrength machines compared to conventional strength training equipment in improving physical performance, muscle strength and body composition in untrained adults. The primary objective is to determine whether the BioStrength machines, which provide real-time feedback on movement amplitude, speed and force, lead to superior results in terms of muscle strength, body composition and training efficiency compared to conventional fitness equipment.
The study will follow a randomised controlled trial design over a 12-week period, using a minimisation technique to assign participants to either the BioStrength training group or the traditional strength training group. This technique ensures that key prognostic factors such as age, gender and baseline handgrip strength are balanced between the groups, as randomisation alone may not adequately address these factors in smaller sample sizes. Participants will attend three training sessions per week, each lasting approximately 60 minutes. The BioStrength group will use advanced machines that provide personalised feedback to optimise training, while the traditional group will use standard strength training machines without feedback technology.
The primary outcomes measured in this study include maximum strength, handgrip strength and body composition. Maximal strength will be assessed using the 10-RM (Repetition Maximum) test on leg press and chest press exercises, which determines the maximum weight participants can lift for 10 consecutive repetitions. Hand grip strength is measured using a Jamar dynamometer, with participants performing three attempts on each hand and recording the highest value. Body composition will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA), a non-invasive method of estimating muscle mass and body fat percentage. In addition, circumference measurements of the arms, legs and waist will provide complementary data on changes in muscle growth and fat distribution.
The study will recruit 42 healthy adults aged 30-65 years with no more than six months of previous resistance training experience. Participants with a history of coronary heart disease, stroke, arthritis, or other medical conditions that could affect physical performance will be excluded. To allow for a 20% drop-out rate, the study will aim to recruit 21 participants per group. Recruitment will take place through a local fitness centre, using social media advertisements and flyers. Participants will be instructed to maintain their usual dietary habits throughout the 12-week intervention period. They will be asked not to make any significant changes to their diet or to introduce any new dietary supplements, as these could influence the outcomes related to muscle strength, body composition and overall physical fitness.
The study will consist of three phases: baseline, intervention and post-intervention. During baseline testing, participants will undergo strength and body composition assessments over two days, including the 10-RM test, handgrip strength measurements, BIA and circumference measurements. The intervention period will last 12 weeks, during which time participants will complete their assigned training programme under the supervision of a sports scientist who will conduct the assessments. After the intervention, all participants will repeat the same tests to assess changes in strength and body composition.
Data will be analysed using two-factor ANOVA to compare pre- and post-intervention outcomes between the two groups. The primary focus will be on changes in maximum strength, handgrip strength and body composition.
It is hypothesised that the BioStrength training group will show greater improvements in strength, handgrip strength and body composition compared to the traditional strength training group. The advanced feedback provided by the BioStrength machines is expected to result in more efficient and effective strength gains. This study has the potential to provide valuable insight into the benefits of using advanced strength training equipment and could influence future training protocols, particularly for individuals new to strength training.
The study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Graz and participants will be fully informed of the purpose, procedures and potential risks of the study before providing written informed consent. All data will be anonymised and confidentiality will be strictly maintained throughout the study.
This research could have significant implications for commercial fitness facilities as it aims to show whether BioStrength machines offer measurable benefits over traditional gym equipment. If successful, the study could contribute to the development of more efficient, data-driven training interventions that optimise muscle growth and body composition improvements for a wider population.
- Conditions
- Muscle Strength, Body Composition, Physical Fitness
- Being tested
- BioStrength Intervention, Conventional training
- Keywords
- Strength training, Muscle strength, Body composition, Customer satisfaction, BioStrength, Technogym, Resistance training, Fitness equipment, Handgrip strength, Randomized controlled trial
- Medical subject headings
- Consumer Behavior
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
BioStrength InterventionDevice
Participants in the Intervention Group will undergo BioStrength training using Technogym equipment. The intervention will last for 12 weeks, with sessions conducted 3 times per week
Conventional trainingDevice
Participants in the Active Comparator group will undergo a conventional strength training program using standard gym machines. Training sessions will occur 3 times per week for 12 weeks. The goal is to compare the outcomes of BioStrength training with traditional strength training.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control Group (No BioStrength Training) | Active comparator | Participants in the Active Comparator group will undergo a conventional strength training program using standard gym machines. Training sessions will occur 3 times per week for 12 weeks. The goal is to compare the outcomes of BioStrength training with traditional strength training. Receives: Device: Conventional training |
| BioStrength training | Experimental | Participants in the Intervention Group will undergo BioStrength training using Technogym equipment. The intervention will last for 12 weeks, with sessions conducted 3 times per week Receives: Device: BioStrength Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Skeletal Muscle Mass
Skeletal muscle mass will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA) at baseline and after the 12-week intervention to evaluate changes in muscle mass.
Measured: Baseline and Week 12
Change in Body Fat Percentage
Body fat percentage will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA) at baseline and after the 12-week intervention to assess reductions in body fat.
Measured: Baseline and Week 12
Change in Handgrip Strength
Handgrip strength will be measured using a Jamar dynamometer, with measurements taken at baseline and after the 12-week intervention.
Measured: Baseline and Week 12
Change in Maximal Strength (10-RM Test)
Maximal strength will be measured using the 10-RM (Repetition Maximum) test for the leg press and chest press exercises at baseline and after the 12-week intervention.
Measured: Baseline and Week 12
Secondary outcomes (2)
Customer Satisfaction (CSAT Questionnaire)
Customer satisfaction with the training experience will be measured using a standardized CSAT questionnaire at the end of the 12-week intervention.
Measured: Week 2 and Week 12
Change in Circumference Measurements (Arm, Leg, and Waist)
Circumference measurements of the arms, legs, and waist will be taken at baseline and after the 12-week intervention to assess changes in muscle size and fat distribution.
Measured: Baseline and Week 12
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Dec 2024
- Study start8 Oct 2024
- Primary completion1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Muscle StrengthStudies 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Graz
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Martin Atia, Principal investigator, University of Graz
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06727695
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Bio-RCT-2024-01
- Acronym
- BIO-STR
- Status last verified
- Oct 2024
- First submitted
- 30 Sep 2024
- Last updated
- 11 Dec 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: The individual participant data (IPD) used in the published results will be shared in an anonymized format. Access will be provided upon request through a secure data repository for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Dec 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Comparative Study of Training Effectiveness: Technogyms Biostrength Devices Vs. Conventional Strength Training Devices: a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06727695
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BIO-STR / Bio-RCT-2024-01
- Conditions
- Muscle Strength, Body Composition, Physical Fitness
- Keywords
- Strength training, Muscle strength, Body composition, Customer satisfaction, BioStrength, Technogym, Resistance training, Fitness equipment
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of GrazUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 11 Dec 2024 (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 study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Technogyms BioStrength equipment compared to traditional strength training equipment over a 12-week intervention period. The study will determine whether BioStrength machines produce more effective results in terms of muscle strength and body composition. Participants will be allocated to either the BioStrength group or the traditional training group using a minimisation technique to balance important prognostic factors such as handgrip strength, age and gender between the groups. Key measurements include maximum strength tests (10RM) for leg press and chest press, handgrip strength using a dynamometer, and body composition using bioimpedance analysis. Circumference measurements will also be taken. The study will assess whether BioStrength equipment provides superior results in muscle strength, body composition and training efficiency compared to conventional gym equipment.
Detailed description
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Technogyms BioStrength machines compared to conventional strength training equipment in improving physical performance, muscle strength and body composition in untrained adults. The primary objective is to determine whether the BioStrength machines, which provide real-time feedback on movement amplitude, speed and force, lead to superior results in terms of muscle strength, body composition and training efficiency compared to conventional fitness equipment.
The study will follow a randomised controlled trial design over a 12-week period, using a minimisation technique to assign participants to either the BioStrength training group or the traditional strength training group. This technique ensures that key prognostic factors such as age, gender and baseline handgrip strength are balanced between the groups, as randomisation alone may not adequately address these factors in smaller sample sizes. Participants will attend three training sessions per week, each lasting approximately 60 minutes. The BioStrength group will use advanced machines that provide personalised feedback to optimise training, while the traditional group will use standard strength training machines without feedback technology.
The primary outcomes measured in this study include maximum strength, handgrip strength and body composition. Maximal strength will be assessed using the 10-RM (Repetition Maximum) test on leg press and chest press exercises, which determines the maximum weight participants can lift for 10 consecutive repetitions. Hand grip strength is measured using a Jamar dynamometer, with participants performing three attempts on each hand and recording the highest value. Body composition will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA), a non-invasive method of estimating muscle mass and body fat percentage. In addition, circumference measurements of the arms, legs and waist will provide complementary data on changes in muscle growth and fat distribution.
The study will recruit 42 healthy adults aged 30-65 years with no more than six months of previous resistance training experience. Participants with a history of coronary heart disease, stroke, arthritis, or other medical conditions that could affect physical performance will be excluded. To allow for a 20% drop-out rate, the study will aim to recruit 21 participants per group. Recruitment will take place through a local fitness centre, using social media advertisements and flyers. Participants will be instructed to maintain their usual dietary habits throughout the 12-week intervention period. They will be asked not to make any significant changes to their diet or to introduce any new dietary supplements, as these could influence the outcomes related to muscle strength, body composition and overall physical fitness.
The study will consist of three phases: baseline, intervention and post-intervention. During baseline testing, participants will undergo strength and body composition assessments over two days, including the 10-RM test, handgrip strength measurements, BIA and circumference measurements. The intervention period will last 12 weeks, during which time participants will complete their assigned training programme under the supervision of a sports scientist who will conduct the assessments. After the intervention, all participants will repeat the same tests to assess changes in strength and body composition.
Data will be analysed using two-factor ANOVA to compare pre- and post-intervention outcomes between the two groups. The primary focus will be on changes in maximum strength, handgrip strength and body composition.
It is hypothesised that the BioStrength training group will show greater improvements in strength, handgrip strength and body composition compared to the traditional strength training group. The advanced feedback provided by the BioStrength machines is expected to result in more efficient and effective strength gains. This study has the potential to provide valuable insight into the benefits of using advanced strength training equipment and could influence future training protocols, particularly for individuals new to strength training.
The study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Graz and participants will be fully informed of the purpose, procedures and potential risks of the study before providing written informed consent. All data will be anonymised and confidentiality will be strictly maintained throughout the study.
This research could have significant implications for commercial fitness facilities as it aims to show whether BioStrength machines offer measurable benefits over traditional gym equipment. If successful, the study could contribute to the development of more efficient, data-driven training interventions that optimise muscle growth and body composition improvements for a wider population.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control Group (No BioStrength Training) | Active comparator | Device: Conventional trainingParticipants in the Active Comparator group will undergo a conventional strength training program using standard gym machines. Training sessions will occur 3 times per week for 12 weeks. The goal is to compare the outcomes of BioStrength training with traditional strength training. |
| BioStrength training | Experimental | Device: BioStrength InterventionParticipants in the Intervention Group will undergo BioStrength training using Technogym equipment. The intervention will last for 12 weeks, with sessions conducted 3 times per week |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 30 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- • Age between 30 and 65 years
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- • History of coronary heart disease
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 |
|---|---|---|
| BioStrength InterventionParticipants in the Intervention Group will undergo BioStrength training using Technogym equipment. The intervention will last for 12 weeks, with sessions conducted 3 times per week | Device | BioStrength training |
| Conventional trainingParticipants in the Active Comparator group will undergo a conventional strength training program using standard gym machines. Training sessions will occur 3 times per week for 12 weeks. The goal is to compare the outcomes of BioStrength training with traditional strength training. | Device | Control Group (No BioStrength Training) |
Primary outcome
Change in Skeletal Muscle Mass
Time frame: Baseline and Week 12
Skeletal muscle mass will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA) at baseline and after the 12-week intervention to evaluate changes in muscle mass.
Change in Body Fat Percentage
Time frame: Baseline and Week 12
Body fat percentage will be measured using bioimpedance analysis (BIA) at baseline and after the 12-week intervention to assess reductions in body fat.
Change in Handgrip Strength
Time frame: Baseline and Week 12
Handgrip strength will be measured using a Jamar dynamometer, with measurements taken at baseline and after the 12-week intervention.
Change in Maximal Strength (10-RM Test)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 12
Maximal strength will be measured using the 10-RM (Repetition Maximum) test for the leg press and chest press exercises at baseline and after the 12-week intervention.
2 secondary outcomes
Customer Satisfaction (CSAT Questionnaire)
Time frame: Week 2 and Week 12
Change in Circumference Measurements (Arm, Leg, and Waist)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 12
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Dec 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. The individual participant data (IPD) used in the published results will be shared in an anonymized format. Access will be provided upon request through a secure data repository for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data
Related trials for Muscle Strength
Enrolling by invitation
Online Exercise Program for Transplant Patients: A Pilot Study
Kidney Transplantation, Physical Function
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Isokinetic Knee Strength, Bilateral Muscle Balance, and Anaerobic Performance in Adolescent Athletes
Isokinetic Knee Strength, Hamstring-to-Quadriceps Strength Ratio
Recruiting
Effects of Urolithin A Supplementation on Glucose Metabolism in Healthy Adults 55 >= Years Old: A Randomized Triple-Masked Controlled Clinical Trial
Healthy Volunteer
Recruiting
Recovery After Fatigue in Young Athletes: Comparison Between TECAR Therapy and Cycle Ergometer"
Muscle Fatigue, Healthy Adult
RecruitingObservational study
Physical Impairments in Premature Ventricular Complex
Premature Ventricular Complexes
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.
Martin Atia principal investigator
University of Graz
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing BioStrength Intervention and Conventional training in people with Muscle Strength and Body Composition, run by University of Graz at 1 site in Austria.
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 6 inclusion and 8 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Dec 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 Austria. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Martin Atia (+436642524153, m.atia@edu.uni-graz.at), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Skeletal Muscle Mass (time frame: Baseline and Week 12). 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 11 Dec 2024.