Ferreira Luis Fernando, Scariot Estela Lopes, da Rosa Luis Henrique Telles
Post-graduation program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Post-graduation program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2023 Feb;105:104868. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2022.104868. Epub 2022 Nov 13.
To compare the results of different modalities of physical exercises on the sarcopenia diagnostic criteria in older people.
Systematic review of systematic reviews. Search strategy included older people and sarcopenia MeSh, performed at mainly databases. Selected studies include older adults, submitted to physical training (Intervention Group: IG) compared to control groups (CG). Quantitative analyses with the inverse variance statistic method (random effects). The effect measures mean difference. Heterogeneity measured with Q-Test.
494 systematic reviews found. After screening, 5 were included (48 papers. n=3,877). Mean age: 74.02±6.1. 73.44% female. Mean interventions duration: 17.38 weeks (average: 2.56 weekly sessions). AMSTAR and PRISMA showed high methodological quality. Meta-analyses compared results of resistance training interventions (RTA) with other than resistance (Non-resistance Training interventions: NRTA). Handgrip strength, skeletal muscle mass (SMM) and gait speed showed statistically significant differences (SSD) favorable to IG. In chair stand test, RTA showed SSD favorable to the IG, and NRTA to CG. The timed-up-and-go do not showed SSD.
The SMM and strength showed better results in RTA, although the confidence intervals (CI) overlap. Both valences can be trained with similar volume and training intensity, which can modify muscle volume and strength. Physical performance obtained better results in NRTA, even with CI overlap. For severely sarcopenic, training including more than one valence may be best. In sarcopenia diagnosis most studies do not take into account the consensuses of standardization, making hard the larger groups analysis.
Being part of any training program can be beneficial for sarcopenia in older people, with resistance training better for strength and SMM, and mixed modalities for physical performance.
比较不同体育锻炼方式对老年人肌肉减少症诊断标准的影响结果。
对系统评价进行系统回顾。检索策略包括在主要数据库中检索老年人和肌肉减少症的医学主题词。纳入的研究包括接受体育训练的老年人（干预组：IG）与对照组（CG）。采用逆方差统计方法（随机效应）进行定量分析。效应量为均值差。用Q检验测量异质性。
共检索到494篇系统评价。筛选后纳入5篇（48篇论文，n = 3877）。平均年龄：74.02±6.1岁。女性占73.44%。平均干预持续时间：17.38周（平均每周2.56次训练）。AMSTAR和PRISMA显示出较高的方法学质量。荟萃分析比较了阻力训练干预（RTA）与非阻力训练干预（NRTA）的结果。握力、骨骼肌质量（SMM）和步速显示出对IG有利的统计学显著差异（SSD）。在椅子站立试验中，RTA显示对IG有利的SSD，而NRTA对CG有利。计时起立行走试验未显示SSD。
虽然置信区间（CI）有重叠，但SMM和力量在RTA中显示出更好的结果。两种效价都可以用相似的训练量和训练强度进行训练，这可以改变肌肉体积和力量。即使CI有重叠，身体机能在NRTA中也能取得更好的结果。对于严重肌肉减少症患者，包括多种效价的训练可能是最佳选择。在肌肉减少症的诊断中，大多数研究没有考虑标准化的共识，这使得大型群体分析变得困难。
参与任何训练计划都可能对老年人的肌肉减少症有益，阻力训练对力量和SMM更有利，混合模式对身体机能更有利。
