Search

Objective: This study aimed to establish normative data for older adults in Hong Kong and explore age and sex differences in functional fitness., Methods: A sample of 944 independent community-dwellers, aged 65-74 years, was evaluated using the Senior Fitness Test battery in addition to hand grip and single leg stance tests. Normative data were reported for the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles in 5-year age groups., Results: Except for upper extremity muscle strength in women and body mass index (BMI) in both sexes, ageing-associated degradation was observed in all testing parameters especially in flexibility, balance, and agility. Significant sex differences were found in all testing parameters with the exception of BMI and static balance with eyes open. Moreover, men demonstrated higher capacities for muscle strength, agility, balance, and aerobic endurance, whereas women showed superior flexibility., Conclusion: The normative values enable the evaluation of individual performance regarding the fitness status of older adults in Hong Kong., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This study examined the validity and reliability of the Cantonese Borg 6-20 Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) scale in monitoring exercise intensity among Chinese older adults. A total of 40 apparently healthy older adults (16 men, 24 women; M age=69.8 yr., SD=4.56) performed two trials of three intermittent exercise tests administered in random order using the cycle ergometer. Results revealed significant differences of RPE, HR, and VO2 between different workloads, and there were moderate to high correlations between RPE and HR and VO2, respectively. Results also found moderate consistency of RPE between Trial 1 and Trial 2. These indicated that the Cantonese 6-20 RPE scale can be used as a valid and reliable tool for monitoring exercise intensity among the Chinese older adults.

The effects of inspiratory muscle (IM) training on maximal 20 m shuttle run performance (Ex) during Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test and on the physiological and perceptual responses to the running test were examined. Thirty men were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 groups. The experimental group underwent a 6 week pressure threshold IM training program by performing 30 inspiratory efforts twice daily, 6 d/week, against a load equivalent to 50% maximal static inspiratory pressure. The placebo group performed the same training procedure but with a minimal inspiratory load. The control group received no training. In post-intervention assessments, IM function was enhanced by >30% in the experimental group. The Ex was improved by 16.3% +/- 3.9%, while the rate of increase in intensity of breathlessness (RPB/4i) was reduced by 11.0% +/- 6.2%. Further, the whole-body metabolic stress reflected by the accumulations of plasma ammonia, uric acid, and blood lactate during the Yo-Yo test at the same absolute intensity was attenuated. For the control and placebo groups, no significant change in these variables was observed. In comparison with previous observations that the reduced RPB/4i resulting from IM warm-up was the major reason for improved Ex, the reduced RPB/4i resulting from the IM training program was lower despite the greater enhancement of IM function, whereas improvement in Ex was similar. Such findings suggest that although both IM training and warm-up improve the tolerance of intense intermittent exercise, the underlying mechanisms may be different.

To examine the criterion-related validity of traditional, modified, and YMCA sit-and-reach tests and the relationships of these with abdominal muscular strength and endurance measured by the sit-up test, 52 university men of mean age 20.7 yr. were administered two trials of six measurements in counterbalanced order, including traditional, modified, and YMCA sit-and-reach tests, passive straight-leg raise, low-back flexibility evaluation, and 1-min. sit-up test. Pearson product-moment correlations were significant (p < .05) for traditional and modified sit-and-reach tests with hamstrings' flexibility (rs = .71 and .77, respectively). Also, the YMCA sit-and-reach test was significantly associated with hamstrings' flexibility (r = .64) and low-back flexibility (r = .47). Stepwise multiple regression indicated hamstrings' flexibility was the only significant predictor of traditional and modified sit-and-reach tests, explaining the variances of 59.1% and 49.8%, respectively. However, both hamstring and low-back flexibility were significant predictors for the YMCA sit-and-reach test, which in total accounted for 52.2% of explained variance. Traditional and modified sit-and-reach tests are valid in assessing hamstrings' flexibility only, whereas the YMCA sit-and-reach test is valid for measuring both the hamstring and low-back flexibility.