Ageing, Muscle Power and Physical Function: A Systematic Review and Implications for Pragmatic Training Interventions.

BACKGROUND: The physiological impairments most strongly associated with functional performance in older people are logically the most efficient therapeutic targets for exercise training interventions aimed at improving function and maintaining independence in later life. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this review were to (1) systematically review the relationship between muscle power and functional performance in older people; (2) systematically review the effect of power training (PT) interventions on functional performance in older people; and (3) identify components of successful PT interventions relevant to pragmatic trials by scoping the literature. METHODS: Our approach involved three stages. First, we systematically reviewed evidence on the relationship between muscle power, muscle strength and functional performance and, second, we systematically reviewed PT intervention studies that included both muscle power and at least one index of functional performance as outcome measures. Finally, taking a strong pragmatic perspective, we conducted a scoping review of the PT evidence to identify the successful components of training interventions needed to provide a minimally effective training dose to improve physical function. RESULTS: Evidence from 44 studies revealed a positive association between muscle power and indices of physical function, and that muscle power is a marginally superior predictor of functional performance than muscle strength. Nine studies revealed maximal angular velocity of movement, an important component of muscle power, to be positively associated with functional performance and a better predictor of functional performance than muscle strength. We identified 31 PT studies, characterised by small sample sizes and incomplete reporting of interventions, resulting in less than one-in-five studies judged as having a low risk of bias. Thirteen studies compared traditional resistance training with PT, with ten studies reporting the superiority of PT for either muscle power or functional performance. Further studies demonstrated the efficacy of various methods of resistance and functional task PT on muscle power and functional performance, including low-load PT and low-volume interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Maximal intended movement velocity, low training load, simple training methods, low-volume training and low-frequency training were revealed as components offering potential for the development of a pragmatic intervention. Additionally, the research area is dominated by short-term interventions producing short-term gains with little consideration of the long-term maintenance of functional performance. We believe the area would benefit from larger and higher-quality studies and consideration of optimal long-term strategies to develop and maintain muscle power and physical function over years rather than weeks

The acute physiological effects of high- and low-velocity resistance exercise in older adults

The aim of the present study was to determine if workload matched, high-velocity (HVE) and low-velocity (LVE) resistance exercise protocols, elicit differing acute physiological responses in older adults. Ten older adults completed three sets of eight exercises on six separate occasions (three HVE and three LVE sessions). Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and blood lactate were measured pre- and post-exercise, heart rate was measured before exercise and following each set of each exercise. Finally, a rating of perceived exertion was measured following each set of each exercise. There were no significant differences in blood lactate (F(1,9) = 0.028; P = 0.872; ηP2 = 0.003), heart rate (F(1,9) = 0.045; P = 0.837; ηP2 = 0.005), systolic blood pressure (F(1,9) = 0.023; P = 0.884; ηP2 = 0.003) or diastolic blood pressure (F(1,9) = 1.516; P = 0.249; ηP2 = 0.144) between HVE and LVE. However, LVE elicited significantly greater ratings of perceived exertion compared to HVE (F(1,9) = 13.059; P = 0.006; ηP2 = 0.592). The present workload matched HVE and LVE protocols produced comparable physiological responses, although greater exertion was perceived during LVE

Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700