| Title |
Water- versus land-based exercise in elderly subjects: effects on physical performance and body composition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s44198 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco Bergamin, Andrea Ermolao, Silvia Tolomio, Linda Berton, Giuseppe Sergi, Marco Zaccaria |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a 24-week exercise protocol carried out in geothermal spring water to improve overall physical function and muscle mass in a group of healthy elderly subjects. A further aim was to compare this water-based protocol with a land-based protocol and a control group. For this purpose, 59 subjects were recruited and randomly allocated to three groups: aquatic group (AG), land group (LG), and control group (CG). AG and LG followed a 6-month, twice-weekly, multimodality exercise intervention. AG underwent the protocol in hot-spring water (36°C) while LG did it in a land-based environment. After the intervention, knee-extension strength was maintained in AG and LG. The 8-foot up-and-go test showed a reduction in both exercise groups (AG -19.3%, P < 0.05; LG -12.6%, P < 0.05), with a significantly greater decrease in AG. The back-scratch test revealed an improvement only in AG (25.8%; P < 0.05), while the sit-and-reach test improved in all groups. Finally, AG reduced fat mass by 4% (P < 0.05), and dominant forearm fat decreased by 9.2% (P < 0.05). In addition, calf muscle density increased by 1.8% (P < 0.05). In summary, both water- and land-based activities were beneficial in maintaining strength and in improving lower-body flexibility. Aquatic exercise appeared a better activity to improve dynamic balance. Thermal swimming pools and the use of rating of perceived exertion as a method of exercise monitoring should be considered potentially useful tools to enhance physical performance and body composition in healthy elderly. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 33% |
| United States | 2 | 17% |
| Comoros | 1 | 8% |
| Brazil | 1 | 8% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
| Scientists | 4 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 302 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 296 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 70 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 54 | 18% |
| Unknown | 87 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 58 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 52 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 8% |
| Unknown | 95 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,754,078
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#420
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,309
of 210,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#10
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 210,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.