Sousa Nelson, Mendes Romeu, Silva André, Oliveira José
1 Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
2 Research Center in Sport Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal.
Clin Rehabil. 2017 Apr;31(4):478-486. doi: 10.1177/0269215516655857. Epub 2016 Jul 10.
To compare the long-term effects of two community-based exercise programs on fall risk factors, such as balance, postural control, mobility and leg strength, in community-dwelling older men.
Single-blinded randomized controlled trial, comparing three groups, with follow-ups at eight, 16, 24 and 32 weeks.
Older men independent-living residing in Maia city, Portugal.
A total of 66 older men (aged 69.0 ±4.9 years) were randomly assigned to an aerobic exercise group ( n = 22), a combined aerobic and resistance exercise group ( n = 22) or a control group ( n = 22).
Both community-based exercise programs consisted of three sessions each week for 32 consecutive weeks and were planned for moderate-to-vigorous intensity. The control group had no exercise intervention.
Main outcomes were measured by the Timed Up and Go Test, functional reach test, 30-second chair stand test and 6-minute walk test, on five different occasions.
Repeated measures of analysis of covariance revealed significant main effects between time × group interaction in all outcomes over time (Timed Up and Go Test: p < 0.001; functional reach test: p = 0.002; 30-second chair stand: p = 0.001; 6-minute walk test: p < 0.001). Both exercise groups reported improvements; however, better performance was identified in the combined aerobic and resistance exercise group compared with the aerobic exercise group (-20.3% vs. -9.1% on the Timed Up and Go Test, +27.5% vs. +10.9% on the functional reach test, +20.8% vs. +7.3% on 30-second chair stand, +10.9% vs. +3.5% on 6-minute walk test).
Adding resistance exercise to aerobic exercise improves factors associated with an increased risk of falls. However, both exercise regimes, combined or aerobic alone, are more effective than no exercise in the reduction of fall risk factors. ClinicalTrials.org #NCT01874132.
比较两种社区锻炼计划对社区居住老年男性跌倒风险因素（如平衡、姿势控制、活动能力和腿部力量）的长期影响。
单盲随机对照试验，比较三组，在第8、16、24和32周进行随访。
居住在葡萄牙马亚市的独立生活老年男性。
共66名老年男性（年龄69.0±4.9岁）被随机分配到有氧运动组（n = 22）、有氧和抗阻联合运动组（n = 22）或对照组（n = 22）。
两种基于社区的锻炼计划均为每周三次，连续32周，计划为中等至剧烈强度。对照组无运动干预。
主要结局通过定时起立行走测试、功能性伸展测试、30秒坐立测试和6分钟步行测试在五个不同时间点进行测量。
重复测量协方差分析显示，随着时间推移，所有结局在时间×组间交互作用上均有显著主效应（定时起立行走测试：p < 0.001；功能性伸展测试：p = 0.002；30秒坐立测试：p = 0.001；6分钟步行测试：p < 0.001）。两个运动组均报告有改善；然而，与有氧运动组相比，有氧和抗阻联合运动组表现更好（定时起立行走测试中分别为-20.3%对-9.1%，功能性伸展测试中为+27.5%对+10.9%，30秒坐立测试中为+20.8%对+7.3%，6分钟步行测试中为+10.9%对+3.5%）。
在有氧运动中加入抗阻运动可改善与跌倒风险增加相关的因素。然而，两种运动方式，联合运动或单独有氧运动，在降低跌倒风险因素方面均比不运动更有效。ClinicalTrials.org #NCT01874132 。
