São Paulo Adventist University Center, São Paulo.
Clin Interv Aging. 2012;7:119-25. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S27747. Epub 2012 May 21.
The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of multisensory versus muscle strengthening to improve postural control in healthy community-dwelling elderly.
We performed a single-blinded study with 46 community-dwelling elderly allocated to strength (GS, n = 23; 70.18 ± 4.8 years 22 women and 1 man) and multisensory exercises groups (GM, n = 23; 68.8 ± 5.9 years; 22 women and 1 man) for 12 weeks.
We performed isokinetic evaluations of muscle groups in the ankle and foot including dorsiflexors, plantar flexors, inversion, and eversion. The oscillation of the center of pressure was assessed with a force platform.
The GM group presented a reduction in the oscillation (66.8 ± 273.4 cm(2) to 11.1 ± 11.6 cm(2); P = 0.02), which was not observed in the GS group. The GM group showed better results for the peak torque and work than the GS group, but without statistical significance.
Although the GM group presented better results, it is not possible to state that one exercise regimen proved more efficacious than the other in improving balance control.
本研究旨在分析多感觉运动与肌肉强化训练对改善健康社区老年人姿势控制的效果。
我们进行了一项单盲研究，将 46 名居住在社区的老年人分为力量组（GS，n=23；70.18±4.8 岁，22 名女性和 1 名男性）和多感觉运动组（GM，n=23；68.8±5.9 岁，22 名女性和 1 名男性），进行为期 12 周的训练。
我们对踝关节和足部的肌肉群进行了等速评估，包括背屈肌、跖屈肌、内翻和外翻。采用力平台评估了中心压力的振荡。
GM 组的压力中心振荡减少（66.8±273.4cm2 至 11.1±11.6cm2；P=0.02），而 GS 组没有观察到这种变化。GM 组的峰值扭矩和功优于 GS 组，但无统计学意义。
尽管 GM 组的结果更好，但不能说明一种运动方案比另一种更能有效地改善平衡控制。
