Effects of Physical Exercise Programs on Sarcopenia Management, Dynapenia, and Physical Performance in the Elderly: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Table 1

Basic characteristics of included randomized controlled clinical trials.

Reference	Population	Design	Intervention	Control	Outcome measurement and definition	Main results
Strasser et al. [6]; Moderate RoB	33 women and men (82.4 ± 6.0 years) with impaired health status (mostly sarcopenic)	RCT	Resistance training (RT): 12 weeks elastic band resistance training (n = 16)	Control group (CG) (n = 17)	Measured by DEXA; Skeletal muscle mass: apendicuar lean mass (ALM in kg); Muscle quality: isokinetic force measurement of knee flexion and extension (Nm/kg)	Muscle mass: apendicular lean mass: no significant differences between groups; Muscle quality (Nm/kg); Baseline 6 months; Extension force; RT: 10.1 ± 2.9 12.1 ± 2.6; CG: 11.5 ± 2.5 9.9 ± 3.0; Flexion force (MQ); RT: 5.2 ± 1.4 6.8 ± 1.0; CG: 5.7 ± 1.5 5.5 ± 1.5
Liao et al. [7]; High RoB	56 sarcopenic or obese women (mean ± SD age 67.3 ± 5.1 years)	RCT	Resistance training (RT): 12 weeks of elastic band resistance training (ERT) (n = 33)	Control group (CG) matched by age (n = 23)	Measured by DEXA; Muscle mass—apendicular lean Mass (ALM in kg); Muscle quality (MQ) after lower limb muscle flexion (kg/kg); Physical capacity and function outcomes; Timed Up and Go (TUG in s); gait speed (GS in m/s); Quality of life (qol measured by SF-36)	Results presented as mean differences between groups (RT-CG); Muscle mass (kg); ALM: 0.99 (0.33, 1.66); Muscle quality (N/kg); MQ-LE: 1.82 (1.25, 2.39); Function; TUG: −1.64 (−2.34, −0.95); GS: 0.14 (0.33, 0.25); QoL; SF-36: 13.62 (6.47, 20.76)
Kim et al.[8]; Moderate RoB	139 sarcopenic elderly women; 69 randomized to resistance training or control group	RCT	Resistance training (RT): 12 weeks elastic band for upper limbs and ankle weight for lower limb training (n = 35)	Control group (CG); Health education (n = 34)	Measured by bioeletrical impedance analysis (BIA); Apendicular skeletal muscle mass (kg); Performance; TUG; GS; grip strength	No differences in muscle mass, strength, and function were observed after intervention
Kim et al.[9]; Moderate RoB	138 sarcopenic elderly women; 64 randomized to resistance training or control group	RCT	Resistance training (RT): 12 weeks elastic band for upper limbs and ankle weight for lower limb training. (n = 32)	Control group (CG): health education (n = 32)	Measured by bioeletrical impedance analysis (BIA); Apendicular skeletal muscle mass (kg); Performance; TUG; GS; grip strength	Apendicular muscle mass: no difference; Performance; Grip strength: no difference; GS and TUG: no relevant differences found
Kim et al.[10]; Moderate RoB	155 sarcopenic elderly women; 78 randomized to exercise group or control group	RCT	Exercise group (EG): 12 weeks combined training—warm up; strengthening exercise, balance and gait training, and cool down. (n = 39)	Control group (CG): health education (n = 39)	Measured by bioeletrical impedance analysis (BIA); Apendicular skeletal muscle mass (kg); Performance; Walking speed, knee extension strength (Nm/kg)	Apendicular muscle mass: no difference; Walking speed (m/s); Baseline 6 months; EG: 1.31 ± 0.24 1.50 ± 0.23; CG: 1.19 ± 0.21 1.22 ± 0.23; Strength: no difference

RCT = randomized clinical trial; RoB: risk of bias; in accordance with Cochrane’s risk of bias tool.