The Study
Increased velocity exercise specific to task training versus the National Institute on Aging's strength training program: changes in limb power and mobility.
This study is like a fair race between two exercise programs to see which one helps older people move better. It randomly assigned people to one of the two programs, so we can say one probably caused the improvement in power. But for overall mobility, both programs did about the same — so we can't say one is clearly better.
Analysis score
Maximum 90 for a randomized controlled trial.
Where the score came from
Two exercise programs helped older adults walk better: one focused on lifting weights slowly, the other on moving quickly with a weighted vest. Both made people stronger, but only the fast-movement program made them more powerful.
Where does this study sit?
Reviews of RCTs (Meta-analyses)
Max 100Randomized Trials
Max 90Reviews of Cohort Studies
Max 85Cohort Studies
Max 72Reviews of Case-Control Studies
Max 63Case-Control Studies
Max 58Cross-Sectional & Case Series
Max 50Expert Opinion
Max 561 / 100
Quality score
Participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups, minimizing bias. The gold standard for testing whether an intervention causes an effect.
Key takeaways
Summary
Based on the study abstract and findings.
- 1Yes — a 1-point SPPB increase is considered clinically meaningful, so both programs helped people move better in daily life, even if one was better at building power.
- 2Fast-movement group: +10% limb power, +20% strength.
- 3Slow-lifting group: 0% power gain, +19% strength.
- 4Both improved mobility score (SPPB) by over 1.4 points.
Score breakdown, methodology, conflicts of interest, evidence analysis & raw study data
Publication
Journal
The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences
Year
2009
Authors
J. Bean, D. Kiely, Sharon I LaRose, E. O'Neill, Richard Goldstein, W. Frontera
Related Content
Claims (6)
Among older adults with limited mobility, two different exercise programs—InVEST training and the National Institute on Aging's strength training program—both lead to measurable improvements in mobility, with an average gain of more than 1.4 points on the Short Physical Performance Battery, and neither program shows a statistically detectable advantage over the other.
In older adults with limited mobility, increasing how fast they move their limbs leads to greater increases in power than increasing how much force their muscles can produce.
In mobility-limited older adults, 16 weeks of InVEST training with weighted vests increases limb power per kilogram by about 10% more than standard strength training, even though both programs improve muscle strength equally.
After 16 weeks of supervised strength training, both the InVEST program and the National Institute on Aging's program result in a 19–20% increase in one-repetition maximum strength in older adults with limited mobility.
In mobility-limited older adults with leg speed problems, InVEST training results in a 0.73-point increase on the SPPB mobility test compared to the National Institute on Aging's strength training program, though the difference was not statistically significant.
In older adults with difficulty moving, a 24-month supervised exercise program reduces the risk of severe mobility loss without changing levels of cellular aging markers in the blood.
Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.