Exploring Potential Benefits of Accumulated Multicomponent-Training in Non-Active Older Adults: From Physical Fitness to Mental Health

• Published in: International journal of environmental research and public health 2021-09, Vol.18 (18), p.9645
• Main Authors: Monteagudo, Pablo, Cordellat, Ana, Roldán, Ainoa, Gómez-Cabrera, Mari Carmen, Pesce, Caterina, Blasco-Lafarga, Cristina
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Activities of daily living; Adults; Aging; Body composition; Cardiorespiratory fitness; Cognitive ability; Design; Executive function; Exercise; Fitness training programs; Gait; Impact analysis; Intervention; Medical referrals; Medical research; Mental health; Mobility; Older people; Physical fitness; Quality of life
• ISSN: 1660-4601; 1661-7827; 1660-4601
• DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18189645

The present study aimed to analyze the impact of a multicomponent training (MCT) program in a group of non-active older adults, comparing two different dose distributions. Twenty-four individuals, assigned to two groups, completed 15 weeks of MCT (2 days/week). The continuous group (CMCT; n = 14, 9 females; 71.07 ± 5.09 years) trained for 60 min/session in the morning. The accumulated group (AMCT; n = 10, 5 females; 72.70 ± 3.59 years) performed the same exercises, volume, and intensity, but the training was distributed twice per day (30 min in the morning; 30 more in the afternoon). Bonferroni post hoc comparisons revealed significant (p < 0.001) and similar large improvements in both groups in lower limb strength (five times sit-to-stand test: CMCT, 12.55 ± 2.83 vs. 9.44 ± 1.72 s; AMCT, 10.37 ± 2.35 vs. 7.46 ± 1.75 s). In addition, there were large gains in preferred walking speed and instrumental daily life activities, which were higher for CMCT and AMCT, respectively (in this order: 1.00 ± 0.18 vs. 1.44 ± 0.26 m/s and 1.09 ± 0.80 vs. 1.58 ± 0.18 m/s; 33.07 ± 2.88 vs. 36.57 ± 1.65 points and 32.80 ± 1.93 vs. 36.80 ± 0.92 points); improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, now moderate for CMCT (474.14 ± 93.60 vs. 529.64 ± 82.76 m) and large for AMCT (515.10 ± 20.24 vs. 589.60 ± 40.38 m); and medium and similar enhancements in agility in both groups (TUG test: CMCT: 7.49 ± 1.11 vs. 6.77 ± 1.16 s; AMCT: 6.84 ± 1.01 vs. 6.18 ± 0.62 s). None of the protocols had an impact on the executive function, whereas health-related quality of life showed a trend to significance in the whole sample only (EQindex overall sample, p = 0.062; d = 0.48 CMCT; d = 0.34 AMCT). Regardless of the type of dose distribution, starting multicomponent training improves physical function in non-active older adults, but does not improve cognitive function at mid-term. Because both forms of MCT showed similar compliance, slightly positive differences in accumulated strategies may indicate some benefits related to breaking afternoon sedentary behaviors, which deserves further research in longer and larger interventions. The mixed nature of MCT suggests accumulative group interventions may be a promising approach to address sedentary aging.