4.5 Review

The effect of resistance training on cognitive function in the older adults: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

期刊

AGING CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 30, 期 11, 页码 1259-1273

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40520-018-0998-6

关键词

Aged; Cognitive function; Resistance training; Exercise prescription

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundAging is often accompanied by decline in aspects of cognitive function. Cognitive decline has harmful effects on living independence and general health. Resistance training is seen as a promising intervention to prevent or delay cognitive deterioration, yet the evidence from reviews is less consistent.AimTo assess the effect of resistance training on cognition in the elderly with and without mild cognitive impairment and to provide an up-to-date overview.MethodsA search was conducted using PUBMED, Web of science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Wan Fang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The searches were limited to articles published in English or Chinese from January 2010 to September 2017.ResultsThe search returned 2634 records, of which 12 articles were included in the systematic review. Main results showed that resistance training had positive effects on the executive function and global cognitive function of the elderly, and short-term interventions had little positive effect on memory and attention. Secondary results demonstrated that there was a significant benefit of triweekly resistance training in global cognitive function and biweekly in executive function of the elderly.ConclusionsResistance training had positive effects on the executive cognitive ability and global cognitive function among the elderly; however, it had a weak-positive impact on memory. No significant improvement was found in attention. Triweekly resistance training has a better effect on general cognitive ability than biweekly. Further studies are needed focusing on the development and application of resistance training among the elderly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据