Questions: What is the effect of high-velocity power training (HVPT) compared with traditional resistance training (TRT) on functional performance in older adults? What is the quality of intervention reporting for the relevant literature?
Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Participants: Older adults (aged > 60 years), regardless of health status, baseline functional capacity or residential status.
Interventions: High-velocity power training with the intent to perform the concentric phase as quickly as possible compared with traditional moderate-velocity resistance training performed with a concentric phase of ≥ 2 seconds.
Outcome measures: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), five times sit-to-stand test (5-STS), 30-second sit-to-stand test (30-STS), gait speed tests, static or dynamic balance tests, stair climb tests and walking tests for distance. The quality of intervention reporting was assessed with the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) score.
Results: Nineteen trials with 1,055 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with TRT, HVPT had a weak-to-moderate effect on change from baseline scores for the SPPB (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.53; low-quality evidence) and TUG (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63; low-quality evidence). The effect of HVPT relative to TRT for other outcomes remained very uncertain. The average CERT score across all trials was 53%, with two trials rated high quality and four rated moderate quality.
Conclusion: HVPT had similar effects to TRT for functional performance in older adults, but there is considerable uncertainty in most estimates. HVPT had better effects on the SPPB and TUG, but it is unclear whether the benefit is large enough to be clinically worthwhile.
Keywords: Aging; Meta-analysis; Physical functional performance; Physical therapy; Resistance training.
Copyright © 2023 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.