Sarcopenia and frailty are age-related syndromes with negative effects on the quality of life of older people and on public health costs. Although extensive research has been carried out on the effects of physical exercise and physical syndromes, there is a knowledge gap when it comes to the effect of resistance training on muscular strength, physical performance, and body composition at early (prevention) and late (treatment) stages in both syndromes combined. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42019138253) to gather the evidence of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of resistance training programs lasting ≥ 8 weeks on strength, physical function, and body composition of adults ≥65 years old diagnosed with pre-sarcopenia, sarcopenia, pre-frailty, or frailty. A search from the earliest record up to and including December 2020 was carried out using the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. A total of 25 studies (n = 2267 participants) were included. Meta-analysis showed significant changes in favour of resistance training for handgrip (ES = 0.51, p = 0.001) and lower-limb strength (ES = 0.93, p < 0.001), agility (ES = 0.78, p = 0.003), gait speed (ES = 0.75, p < 0.001), postural stability (ES = 0.68, p = 0.007), functional performance (ES = 0.76, p < 0.001), fat mass (ES = 0.41, p = 0.001), and muscle mass (ES = 0.29, p = 0.002). Resistance training during early stages had positive effects in all variables during early stages (ES > 0.12), being particularly effective in improving gait speed (ES = 0.63, p = 0.016) and functional strength (ES = 0.53, p = 0.011). Based on these results, resistance training should be considered as a highly effective preventive strategy to delay and attenuate the negative effects of sarcopenia and frailty in both early and late stages.

Aims A reduction of habitual physical activity due to prolonged COVID-19 quarantine can have serious consequences for patients with cardiovascular diseases, such as heart failure. This study aimed to explore the effect of COVID-19 nationwide quarantine on accelerometer-assessed physical activity of heart failure patients. Methods and results We analysed the daily number of steps in 26 heart failure patients during a 6-week period that included 3 weeks immediately preceding the onset of the quarantine and the first 3 weeks of the quarantine. The daily number of steps was assessed using a wrist-worn accelerometer worn by the patients as part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial. Multilevel modelling was used to explore the effect of the quarantine on the daily step count adjusted for weather conditions. As compared with the 3 weeks before the onset of the quarantine, the step count was significantly lower during each of the first 3 weeks of the quarantine (P < 0.05). When the daily step count was averaged across the 3 weeks before and during the quarantine, the decrease amounted to 1134 (SE 189) steps per day (P < 0.001), which translated to a 16.2% decrease. Conclusions The introduction of the nationwide quarantine due to COVID-19 had a detrimental effect on the level of habitual physical activity in heart failure patients, leading to an abrupt decrease of daily step count that lasted for at least the 3-week study period. Staying active and maintaining sufficient levels of physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic are essential despite the unfavourable circumstances of quarantine.

Aims Accelerometers are becoming increasingly commonplace for assessing physical activity; however, their use in patients with cardiovascular diseases is relatively substandard. We aimed to systematically review the methods used for collecting and processing accelerometer data in cardiology, using the example of heart failure, and to provide practical recommendations on how to improve objective physical activity assessment in patients with cardiovascular diseases by using accelerometers. Methods and results Four electronic databases were searched up to September 2019 for observational, interventional, and validation studies using accelerometers to assess physical activity in patients with heart failure. Study and population characteristics, details of accelerometry data collection and processing, and description of physical activity metrics were extracted from the eligible studies and synthesized. To assess the quality and completeness of accelerometer reporting, the studies were scored using 12 items on data collection and processing, such as the placement of accelerometer, days of data collected, and criteria for non-wear of the accelerometer. In 60 eligible studies with 3500 patients (of those, 536 were heart failure with preserved ejection fraction patients), a wide variety of accelerometer brands (n = 27) and models (n = 46) were used, with Actigraph being the most frequent (n = 12), followed by Fitbit (n = 5). The accelerometer was usually worn on the hip (n = 32), and the most prevalent wear period was 7 days (n = 22). The median wear time required for a valid day was 600 min, and between two and five valid days was required for a patient to be included in the analysis. The most common measures of physical activity were steps (n = 20), activity counts (n = 15), and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (n = 14). Only three studies validated accelerometers in a heart failure population, showing that their accuracy deteriorates at slower speeds. Studies failed to report between one and six (median 4) of the 12 scored items, with non-wear time criteria and valid day definition being the most underreported items. Conclusions The use of accelerometers in cardiology lacks consistency and reporting on data collection, and processing methods need to be improved. Furthermore, calculating metrics based on raw acceleration and machine learning techniques is lacking, opening the opportunity for future exploration. Therefore, we encourage researchers and clinicians to improve the quality and transparency of data collection and processing by following our proposed practical recommendations for using accelerometers in patients with cardiovascular diseases, which are outlined in the article.

BackgroundThe aging process is associated with a progressive decline of neuromuscular function, increased risk of falls and fractures, impaired functional performance, and loss of independence. Plyometric training may mitigate or even reverse such age-related deterioration; however, little research on the effects of plyometric exercises has been performed in older adults.ObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of plyometric training in older adults.MethodsPapers reporting on randomized trials of plyometric training in older adults (≥ 60 years) and published up to December 2017 were sought in the PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and EMBASE databases, and their methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. A narrative synthesis of the findings is presented in this systematic review.ResultsOf the 2236 identified papers, 18 were included in the review, reporting on 12 different studies with a mean PEDro score of 6.0 (range 4–7). Altogether, 289 subjects (176 females and 113 males) were included in 15 intervention groups with plyometric components (n = 8–36 per group); their mean age ranged from 58.4 to 79.4 years. The plyometric training lasted from 4 weeks to 12 months. Muscular strength, bone health, body composition, postural stability, and jump and physical performance were the most often reported outcomes. No study reported increased occurrence of injuries or other adverse events related to plyometric exercises.ConclusionPlyometric training is a feasible and safe training option with potential for improving various performance, functional, and health-related outcomes in older persons.

IntroductionAlthough numerous activity trackers have been validated in healthy populations, validation is lacking in chronic heart failure patients who normally walk at a slower pace, making it difficult for researchers and clinicians to implement activity monitors during physical activity interventions.MethodsSix consumer-level activity monitors were validated in a 3-day field study in patients with chronic heart failure and healthy individuals under free living conditions. Furthermore, the same devices were evaluated in a lab-based study during treadmill walking at speeds of 2.4, 3.0, 3.6, and 4.2 km·h-1. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were used to evaluate the agreement between the activity monitors and the criterion, and mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) were calculated to assess differences between each device and the criterion (MAPE <10% was considered as a threshold for validity).ResultsIn the field study of healthy individuals, all but one of the activity monitors showed a substantial correlation (CCC ≥0.95) with the criterion device and MAPE <10%. In patients with heart failure, the correlation of only two activity monitors (Garmin vívofit 3 and Withings Go) was classified as at least moderate (CCC ≥0.90) and none of the devices had MAPE <10%. In the lab-based study at speeds 4.2 and 3.6 km·h-1, all activity monitors showed substantial to almost perfect correlations (CCC ≥0.95) with the criterion and MAPE in the range 1%-3%. However, at slower speeds of 3.0 and 2.4 km·h-1, the accuracy of all devices substantially deteriorated: their correlation with the criterion decreased below 90% and their MAPE increased to 4–8% and 10–45%, respectively.ConclusionsEven though none of the tested activity monitors fall within arbitrary thresholds for validity, most of them perform reasonably well enough to be useful tools that clinicians can use to simply motivate chronic heart failure patients to walk more.