Effect of Resistance Training Volume on Muscular Strength, Stability and Mobility in Sedentary Obese Elderly Women

Hossein  TaheriChadorneshin; Esmat  Rashidi; Nader  Nokhodchi; Zeinab  Fattahi

doi:10.18502/ehj.v11i2.20705

Hossein TaheriChadorneshin Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran
Esmat Rashidi Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Kashmar Higher Education Institute, Kashmar, Iran
Nader Nokhodchi Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran
Zeinab Fattahi Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ehj.v11i2.20705

Keywords: Resistance Training, Postural Balance, Muscle Strength, Physical Fitness, Aging

Abstract

Introduction: There is limited knowledge regarding how different resistance training (RT) volumes affect musculoskeletal fitness adaptations. Hence, our study compared the efficacy of varied RT volumes in enhancing maximal strength, stability, and mobility among sedentary, obese older women.

Methods: Thirty sedentary, obese elderly women (mean age 64.57 ± 4.50 years; mean body mass index 32.34 ± 2.69 kg/m²) participated in this experimental design and were randomly assigned to control (C), low-volume RT (LVRT), and high-volume RT (HVRT) groups. Participants in the LVRT group performed one set of each exercise, while those in the HVRT group performed three sets. Both training groups trained twice weekly for 12 weeks. Assessments were conducted at baseline and post-intervention, including the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, Sharpened Romberg test (SRT), walking and stepping up/down parameters, and whole-body maximal strength.

Results: Post-training, significant enhancements in maximal strength and SRT (p = 0.001 and p = 0.019, respectively) performance were observed in both the LVRT and HVRT groups when compared to the C. Notably, the magnitude of improvement in maximal strength was greater in the HVRT than in the LVRT. Furthermore, time of TUG (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively), walking (p = 0.012 and p = 0.001, respectively), stepping up (p = 0.034 and p = 0.001, respectively), and stepping down (p = 0.016 and p = 0.001, respectively) tests all showed significant reductions in the LVRT and HVRT groups relative to the C. In addition, the time of TUG (p = 0.007), stepping up (p = 0.020), and stepping down (p = 0.001) tests, demonstrated further significant reductions in the HVRT compared to the LVRT group.

Conclusion: RT improves strength, mobility in elderly obese women; higher volumes yield superior gains. These findings support HVRT incorporation to maximize functional benefits this population.