Comparison of traditional vs. lighter load strength training on fat-free mass, strength, power and affective responses in middle and older-aged adults: A pilot randomized trial.

Anoop T Balachandran, Yipeng Wang, Frank Szabo, Catharyn Watts-Battey, Brad J Schoenfeld, Zachary Zenko, Norberto Quiles

Journal: Experimental gerontology 2023;178():112219

PMID: 37236327

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Strength training is widely recommended to improve strength, muscle mass and power. However, the feasibility and potential efficacy of strength training using lighter loads near failure on these outcomes in middle and older-aged adults remains unclear.

METHODS

23 community-living adults were randomized into two groups: Traditional strength training (ST) (8-12 repetitions) or a lighter load, higher repetitions (LLHR) (20-24 repetitions) group. Participants performed a full-body workout (twice a week) with 8 exercises at a perceived exertion of 7-8 (0-10 scale) for 10 weeks. Post-testing was performed by an assessor blinded to group assignments. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to examine between group differences using baseline values as a covariate.

RESULTS

The study involved individuals with a mean age of 59 years, of which 61 % were women. The LLHR group demonstrated a high attendance rate of 92 % (9.5 %) and reported leg press exercise RPE of 7.1 (0.53), along with a session feeling scale of 2.0 (1.7). There was a trivial difference in fat free mass (FFM) favoring LLHR vs ST [0.27 kg 95 % CI (-0.87, 1.42)]. The ST group exhibited superior increases in leg press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) strength [-14 kg (-23, -5)], while the LLHR group showed greater strength endurance increases (65 % 1RM) [8 repetitions (2, 14)]. Leg press power [41 W (-42, 124)] and exercise efficacy [-3.8 (-21.2, 13.5)] demonstrated trivial between-group differences.

CONCLUSION

A pragmatic, full-body strength training program with lighter loads taken close to failure appears to be a viable option for promoting muscular adaptations in middle- and older-aged adults. These results are exploratory and require a larger trial for confirmation.

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Address: Department of Family, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, Queens College, The City University of New York, Flushing, NY, USA. Electronic address: [email protected].; Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.; Department of Family, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, Queens College, The City University of New York, Flushing, NY, USA.; Department of Exercise Science and Recreation, CUNY Lehman College, Bronx, NY, USA.; California State University Bakersfield, Department of Kinesiology, Bakersfield, CA, USA.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.