Search

Background: While previous studies indicate muscle-strengthening exercises may reduce mortality risk, further research is needed to increase certainty of the evidence. We investigated overall and dose-response associations between weight training and the risks of all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer mortality in a large cohort of older adults with long follow-up time and a large number of deaths. We also investigated the joint associations of weight training and aerobic exercise with mortality risk., Methods: Weight training was assessed via self-report in 2004-05 in the National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons (NIH-AARP) Diet and Health Study (USA; n = 216 339), with follow-up to 2019. Cox regression estimated the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associations between weight training and mortality, after adjusting for confounders including aerobic exercise., Results: Around 25% of participants [mean age = 69.9 years (standard deviation = 5.4), 58% men] reported engaging in weight training over the past year, and there were 79 107 (37%) deaths. Engaging in any weight training (vs none) was associated with lower risks of all-cause (HR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.93-0.96), CVD (HR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.90-0.95) and cancer mortality (HR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.92-0.98). More time spent in weight training was associated with only marginally greater risk reductions. Larger risk reductions were observed among women than men. Performing both aerobic exercise and weight training conferred the greatest mortality risk reduction; weight training was not associated with mortality risk among participants who did no aerobic exercise., Conclusion: Performing any amount of weight training lowered mortality risk., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Introduction: This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the relationship between resistance training and all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality., Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registration Number CRD42019136654) was conducted. MEDLINE (OVID), Embase, Emcare, SPORTDiscus, The Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS were searched from inception to June 6, 2021. Included studies reported resistance training as the exposure and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease‒specific mortality, and/or cancer-specific mortality as outcome/s. Only studies conducted among nonclinical adult populations (aged ≥18 years) and written in English were included., Results: A total of 10 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Compared with undertaking no resistance training, undertaking any amount of resistance training reduced the risk of all-cause mortality by 15% (RR of 6 studies=0.85; 95% CI=0.77, 0.93), cardiovascular disease mortality by 19% (RR of 4 studies=0.81; 95% CI=0.66, 1.00), and cancer mortality by 14% (RR of 5 studies=0.86; 95% CI=0.78, 0.95). A dose-response meta-analysis of 4 studies suggested a nonlinear relationship between resistance training and the risk of all-cause mortality. A maximum risk reduction of 27% was observed at around 60 minutes per week of resistance training (RR=0.74; 95% CI=0.64, 0.86). Mortality risk reductions diminished at higher volumes., Discussion: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides the strongest evidence to date that resistance training is associated with reduced risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer-specific mortality. More research is needed to determine whether any potential mortality benefits gained from resistance training diminish at higher volumes., (Copyright © 2022 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical exercise interventions show that combining moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) and muscle strengthening exercise (MSE) has more favourable cardiometabolic health benefits than engaging in only one mode of physical activity. However, few studies have examined these associations among community-based samples and none among Asian adults., Methods: This cross-sectional analysis included 9120 participants aged 20-80 years from the 2014-2015 Korea National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey. Fasting blood samples were analysed for adverse cardiometabolic biomarkers (e.g. high glucose/glycohaemoglobin/triglycerides) and MVPA and MSE were assessed using validated questionnaires. Poisson regression models examined the association between the individual and total number of adverse biomarkers across categories of MVPA-MSE guideline adherence (met neither (reference); met MSE only; met MVPA only; met both) and prevalence ratios are reported adjusted for covariates (e.g. age, education, smoking, waist circumference and sitting time)., Results: The mean ± SD age was 46.2 ± 16.3 years and 50.3% of the participants were women. Compared with meeting neither guideline, meeting both guidelines had the lowest prevalence ratios for four out of eight individual adverse cardiometabolic biomarkers. In a sex-stratified analysis of men, only meeting both guidelines had a lower prevalence ratio for ≥4 adverse biomarkers (prevalence ratio 0.67; 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.85). For women, the prevalence ratio for ≥4 adverse biomarkers was lowest among those meeting both guidelines (prevalence ratio 0.46; 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.66), followed by MSE only (prevalence ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.42-0.96) and MVPA only (prevalence ratio 0.78; 95% confidence interval 0.65-0.92)., Conclusions: Among a large sample of Korean adults, concurrent MVPA-MSE was independently associated with favourable cardiometabolic outcomes. This study supports public health action to promote adherence to MVPA-MSE guidelines to enhance cardiovascular health among Korean adults.