Skip to content

Power Training Versus Strength Training in the Elderly

Biomechanical Gait Indicators of Elderly Women in Response to Strength Training or Power Training

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02852668
Enrollment
30
Registered
2016-08-02
Start date
2011-06-30
Completion date
2012-01-31
Last updated
2016-08-02

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Healthy

Keywords

elderly, strength training, power training, functional capacity, gait biomechanics

Brief 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. 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.

Interventions

This experimental groups underwent an intervention period of power training

OTHERStrength Training

This experimental groups underwent an intervention period of strength training

Sponsors

University of Sao Paulo
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
65 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* sedentary women with no physical mobility limitations

Exclusion criteria

* attending less than 75% of the intervention sessions and not attending the final evaluation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Gait kinematicsthrough study completion, an average of 6 monthstoe clearance: minimum vertical distance of the forefoot and the ground during swing phase
Timed up and go testthrough study completion, an average of 6 monthstime needed to get up from a seated position walk 3 meters and walk back to the chair
Muscle powerthrough study completion, an average of 6 monthsknee extensors muscle power
electromyography gait analysisthrough study completion, an average of 6 monthsKnee extensors and flexors muscles co-contraction during the gait cycle

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026