JOURNAL

10.1177/0898264305281102
Simons, Andel
OF /AGING
EXERCISE
AND AND
HEALFUNCTION
TH / February
AL2006
FITNESS

The Effects of Resistance Training

and Walking on Functional
Fitness in Advanced Old Age

ROBERT SIMONS
Bonsai Spa & Wellness Clinic, Largo, Florida
ROSS ANDEL
University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida

The authors assessed the effects of resistance training and walking exercise on mea-
sures of functional fitness. Sixty-four volunteers (average age 83.5 years) from an
independent-living facility were randomly assigned to walking, resistance training,
or control groups. Participants in the walking and resistance-training groups engaged
in two exercise sessions per week for 16 weeks. Measures of functional fitness
included upper and lower body strength, hip and shoulder flexibility, agility and bal-
ance, coordination, blood pressure, and resting heart rate. Repeated measures analy-
sis of variance was used to examine pretest to posttest differences. Both exercise
groups showed significant improvements relative to control group in upper and lower
body strength, shoulder flexibility, and agility and balance exercise. Findings demon-
strate that exercise can lead to improvements in multiple domains of functional fitness
even among very old, previously sedentary individuals, possibly making activities of
daily living easier to perform.

Keywords: resistance training; walking; functional fitness; older adults

Inevitably, age leads to some functional decline and greater likelihood

of difficulties in performing activities of daily living. Functional
decline in older adults appears to be influenced by levels of physical
activity (e.g., Hubert, Bloch, Oehlert, & Fries, 2002). Review studies
AUTHORS’ NOTE: Many thanks to William Haley for his helpful comments on an earlier
version of this manuscript. For further information contact: Ross Andel, University of South
Florida, School of Aging Studies MHC 1321, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, Tampa, FL 33620. Phone:
813-974-9743, Fax: 813-974-9754, E-mail: randel@cas.usf.edu
JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH, Vol. 18 No. 1, February 2006 91-105
DOI: 10.1177/0898264305281102
© 2006 Sage Publications
91
92 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

indicate that physical inactivity is related to accelerated depletion of

functional reserves and deficits in muscle strength and neuromuscular
activation, leading to increased incidence of functional problems,
frailty, and falls (King, Rejeski, & Buchner, 1998; Mazzeo & Tanaka,
2001; Van der Bij, Laurant, & Wensing, 2002; Spiraduso, 1995). At
the same time, sedentary lifestyle is still common among older adults
and appears to increase with advancing age. According to the Third
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (Christmas &
Andersen, 2000), physical inactivity rates among American adults
average 26% for ages 45 to 64, 27% at ages 65 to 74, and 46% at ages
older than 75 years.
Growing evidence supports the notion that physical activity can
offset age-related functional decline and preserve independence lon-
ger into old age. For example, the positive effect of walking on health
has been recognized for centuries. Hippocrates wrote around 400 B.C.
that “Walking is man’s best medicine” (Spiraduso, 1995, p. 17).
Recent scientific studies provide evidence that walking can improve
functional health in old age (Brown & Holloszy, 1993; Hamdorf &
Penhall, 1999; Wong, Wong, Pang, Azizah, & Dass, 2003). Resis-
tance training has also gained attention as a strategy to support func-
tional health in older adults (e.g., Brandon, Boyette, Lloyd, & Gaasch,
2004; Campbell, Crim, Young, & Evans, 1994; Fiatarone et al., 1994).
Age-related decrements in muscle strength, power, and flexibility
occur naturally across middle and older adulthood (e.g., Hurley &
Hagberg, 1998). For example, strength is estimated to decrease by
40% to 50% between 25 and 80 years of age (American College of
Sports Medicine, 1998). In the Framingham study, 40% of women
between the ages of 55 and 64, 45% of women aged 65 and 74, and
65% of women between 75 and 84 years of age were unable to lift 10
pounds (Jette & Branch, 1981). Many of the same women also
reported having difficulties with performing normal household work.
Musculoskeletal deficits are being recognized as an important under-
lying cause of the onset of frailty and increased incidence of falls with
age (e.g., Fiatarone & Evans, 1993; Hurley & Hagberg, 1998) as well
as difficulties performing daily and leisure activities such as carrying
grocery bags, cooking, gardening, and traveling (Spiraduso, 1995).
Exercise programs appear to support muscular, functional, and
cardiovascular health. Intervention studies with older adults report
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 93

measurable gains in muscle mass and strength following resistance-

training programs (Akima et al., 2001; Cavani, Mier, Musto, &
Tummers, 2002; Fiatarone et al., 1990). Others found exercise-related
increase in balance, agility, and flexibility (Cavani et al., 2002) and
neuromuscular function (Hakkinen & Hakkinen, 1995; Taaffe, Duret,
Wheeler, & Marcus, 1999) as well as reduced incidence of falls
(Buchner et al., 1997; Province et al., 1995). Finally, moderate exer-
cise may support cardiovascular function in older adults (Myers,
2003).
Increasing attention has been paid to the role of exercise in health
promotion in old age. However, still little is known about benefits of
exercise among sedentary individuals in advanced old age although
older adults older than 80 years of age are the fastest growing segment
of the population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1996) and have a higher
likelihood of living a sedentary life than younger cohorts (Christmas
& Andersen, 2000).
This study explored the effects of 16 weeks of resistance training
and walking exercise on measures of functional and cardiovascular
fitness in a sample of adults in advanced old age who were sedentary
prior to the study and lived independently in a community. The goal
was to assess the effects of the two types of exercise on multiple mea-
sures of functional fitness, namely, upper and lower body strength,
flexibility, agility and dynamic balance, coordination, and cardiovas-
cular fitness. A secondary goal was to explore feasibility and useful-
ness of walking and resistance training among these individuals. We
hypothesized that both training groups would outperform the control
group on the examined measures of functional fitness. We also
expected that the training groups would be able to adhere to their
exercise routines for the duration of the study.

Method

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 64 residents (45 women, 19 men) from an inde-

pendent living facility. This type of facility provides meal and activity
services for the residents but typically does not assist with activities of
94 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

daily living. Potential volunteers were recruited through community

paper and newspaper advertisements, announcements in the commu-
nity, and a study presentation. The inclusion criteria were (a) clear-
ance to participate in an exercise program by the primary physician,
(b) lack of regular (2 to 3 times a week) engagement in strenuous
physical activity for at least 1 year prior to the study, and (c) being at
least 65 years of age at the time of study initiation. In addition, the par-
ticipants were ambulatory, nonhypertensive, nondiabetic, and non-
demented. All participants were Caucasian. The study was approved
by the Institutional Review Board at the University of South Florida.
Several participants in each group used canes, walkers, and electri-
cal transports for safety and convenience but were able to perform
their prescribed exercise routines. Participants were on average 83.5
years of age (SD = 6.2, range 66 to 96 years). Only five participants
were less than 75 years of age. Women accounted for 73% of the
sample.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two exercise groups
or a control group. Twenty-one participants (15 women, 6 men) were
assigned to the resistance-training program, 18 participants (11 women,
7 men) were assigned to the walking program, and 21 participants (18
women, 3 men) were assigned to the control group. Participants were
informed that the intervention programs would be made available to
all participants on the completion of the study. Four participants
dropped out during the course of the study, 2 for nonstudy related ill-
nesses and 2 for personal reasons. Of these 4 participants, 1 was from
the walking group, 2 were from the resistance-training group, and 1
was from the control group.

PROCEDURES

All participants regardless of group assignment completed a pretest

and posttest that consisted of measures of functional fitness including
upper and lower body muscle strength, joint flexibility, agility and
balance, coordination, and cardiovascular health. Participants in the
resistance-training group and the walking group also completed two
exercise sessions per week for a period of 16 weeks.
All participants were encouraged to attend a series of six 1-hour
health lectures that were given at approximately 3-week intervals
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 95

throughout the 16-week intervention by one of the authors. The lec-

ture topics were aging in the 21st century, senior fitness program
development, balance and stability training, aging and the mind,
aging and nutrition—Part 1, aging and nutrition—Part 2.

PRETEST AND POSTTEST ASSESSMENTS

All pretest and posttest measures were administered by trained

instructors who were selected for this part of the study from the Foun-
tains Fountain of Youth Fitness Center or Simons Fitness Enterprises
personal training staff. These instructors were blind to the interven-
tion status.
We assessed muscle strength using a manual developed by the
American Alliance for Health Physical Education, Recreation, and
Dance (AAHPERD; Osness, 1990)—Functional Fitness Assessment
for Adults Over 60. The 24-hour test-retest reliability of the measures
was assessed by several studies and was .80 or higher, with most val-
ues more than .90 (see Osness, 1990, pp. 21, 22). In agreement with
the AAHPERD manual, participants were tested for lower and upper
body muscle strength using one-repetition maximum (1-RM) method
where participants are asked to perform one full-strength repetition of
a particular exercise two or three times, following a short warm-up.
The highest value was recorded.

Strength. Lower body strength was measured as total pounds from

the 1-RM on leg extensions, leg curl, and leg press machines. Leg
extensions and leg press reflect quadriceps strength and leg curls
reflect hamstring strength. Upper body strength was measured as total
pounds from the 1-RM on lat pull-down, upper back, and chest press
machines. Lat pull-down targets latissimus dorsi, one of the major
back muscles. The upper back exercise resembles a rowing motion but
with no leg movement, targeting deltoid and scapular muscles. Chest
(or bench) press targets chest muscles, particularly the pectoralis
major, as well as triceps and deltoid muscles. All testing repetitions
were initially demonstrated and performed with strict adherence to
proper form (slow movement and full range of motion) for both
testing accuracy and safety.
96 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

Flexibility. To measure general flexibility, we used the Sit-And-

Reach test from the AAHPERD manual. During this test, the partici-
pant sits on the floor with the knees extended and reaches as far
forward as possible. Distance reached was assessed in inches. Joint
flexibility was further assessed with a mechanical goniometer at the
shoulder joint and the hip joint as degrees of movement. Shoulder
flexibility was a composite of scores attained on shoulder abduction
and shoulder flexion. We measured shoulder abduction and shoulder
flexion from the side position (arm vertical) to the highest point
attained without torso movement. Hip flexibility was measured as
maximum hip flexion. Participants performed hip flexion from the
supine position (thigh horizontal) to the highest point attained with
knee bent. All flexibility assessments were taken on the right side of
the body.

Eye-hand coordination. We used the Soda-Pop test from the

AAHPERD manual. While seated, participants were timed as they
grasped, turned upside down, and replaced three unopened soda cans
that are 5 inches apart. The better time (in seconds) from two trials was
recorded.

Agility and balance. We used the Agility and Dynamic Balance test
from the AAHPERD manual. The score was calculated as total time
(in seconds) needed to repeatedly stand up from an armless chair,
negotiate a short obstacle course made from three cones, sit down, and
lift the feet. Two cones were placed five feet to either side of the chair
and six feet behind the chair.

Cardiovascular health. We assessed resting heart rate (number of

beats per minute) and systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Partici-
pants were allowed a minimum of 10 min of rest. Readings were taken
in a seated position.

INTERVENTION

Trained instructors from the Fountains Fountain of Youth Fitness

Center or Simons Fitness Enterprises personal training staff were
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 97

selected to provide supervision for the intervention part of the study.

Prior to each intervention session, participants were supervised through
a warm-up routine that included neck rotations, volume breathing, tri-
ceps stretch (i.e., one hand at a time behind the back), shoulder turn
(i.e., reach behind the shoulder blade), two-legged rock, a hamstring
stretch, and a knees-to-chest stretch.

Resistance-training program. As part of the warm-up, participants

were allowed and encouraged to perform several repetitions, with no
resistance on each machine to reduce the risk of injury. The initial
weight per exercise machine, representing pounds of resistance, was
set at 75% of the individual’s 1-RM from the initial assessment (pre-
test). Each workout consisted of six strength exercises performed on
six Keiser machines: leg extensions, leg curls, leg press, lat pull-down,
rowing movement, and chest press.
Each exercise was performed for one set of 10 repetitions. When 10
repetitions were completed with proper exercise form for three to five
consecutive workouts the weight load was increased by 5%. A proper
exercise form was defined as relatively slow movement and full range
of motion. All training repetitions were performed in approximately 7
s, with 2 s for each lifting movement (concentric muscle action), 4 s
for each lowering movement (eccentric muscle action), and a 1 s pause
at full muscle contraction to avoid momentum as a factor. All training
repetitions were executed through the full range of joint movement as
determined by the participant’s functional ability and freedom from
discomfort. The duration of the training sessions varied across partici-
pants but averaged between 15 and 20 min of overall duration and 6
min of muscle activity, as each of the six training exercises required
about 1 min of muscle activity.
The trained instructors initially assisted participants getting on and
off the machines, setting the seat positions, and designating the weight
at the appropriate resistance level. They also provided participants
with encouragement, feedback, and reinforcement throughout the
workout. Some participants, after a period of time, were paired up to
perform the exercise circuit with someone of similar abilities. How-
ever, all participants were supervised throughout the duration of the
study, especially for periodic resistance increases.
98 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

Walking program. The walking program consisted of two walking

sessions per week during the period of 16 weeks. The initial walk
length and pace were determined at the beginning of the study based
on a preassessment performance during a timed, 880-yard walk. Par-
ticipants were monitored individually and encouraged to gradually
increase the distance of their walks and reduce the elapsed time. How-
ever, the walks were self-paced and no maximum time was set to com-
plete the exercise. An outdoor walk course and an indoor inclement
weather course were designated. Participants performed their walks
on the same day at the same time to enhance exercise adherence and
lessen the supervisory task. All walks were supervised and recorded,
and participants were encouraged to increase pace and distance
walked.

ANALYSES

We used paired t tests to calculate within-group pretest-to-posttest

differences. Given the number of comparisons performed, these anal-
yses should only be considered exploratory. We used one-way analy-
sis of variance (ANOVA) to test between-group differences in age and
baseline (pretest) scores.
To explore differences in performance on functional fitness mea-
sures attributable to intervention, we performed separate pairwise
comparisons within a 2(group: walking or resistance training vs. con-
trol) × 2(test: pretest vs. posttest) mixed-design repeated measures
analyses of variance (RM-ANOVA). The first factor was between-
groups and the second factor was within-groups. Comparing each
exercise group separately against the control group allowed the most
direct examination of our main hypothesis—to explore the effects of
any exercise on functional measures—and reduced the chances of
committing Type II error because of the relatively small sample size.
Similar pairwise comparisons were performed, for example, by
Brandon et al. (2004), Buchner et al. (1997), and Fiatarone et al.
(1994) in studies similar to ours.
We used the procedure general linear model (GLM) for unbalanced
designs from the SAS statistical software package (SAS Institute,
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 99

1999a) for one-way and repeated measures ANOVAs. This procedure

calculates a general linear model and is preferred over SAS procedure
ANOVA for its ability to account for differences in sample size across
treatment groups (SAS Institute, 1999b). The main goal of these anal-
yses was to test the statistical significance of the group-by-test inter-
action. When group-by-test interaction was significant, the post hoc
Tukey’s test of honestly significant differences was used to explore
the direction of the differences identified by the significant interac-
tion. The level of statistical significance was set at a two-tailed .05
level in all analyses. This level was automatically adjusted by the
Tukey’s test for comparison-wise Type I error.
To avoid multiple comparisons within the same domain in the main
analyses, we used composite measures of upper body strength (sum of
lat pull-down, chest press, and upper back), lower body strength (sum
of leg extensions, leg curl, and leg press), and shoulder flexibility
(sum of shoulder flexion and shoulder adduction). We used z scores to
account for variations in score ranges across these measures. Vari-
ables within each composite were highly correlated (r = .78 or higher).

Results

The average age was 81.6 years (SD = 3.3) in the walking group,
84.6 years (SD = 4.5) in the resistance-training group, and 84.0 years
(SD = 3.3) in the control group. One-way ANOVA yielded no signifi-
cant between-group differences in age.
Mean scores, standard deviations, and within-group pretest to
posttest comparisons for all functional fitness measures are presented
in Table 1. There were no significant differences in pretest perfor-
mance across the three groups. Overall, paired sample t tests indicated
that participants in the walking and resistance-training groups per-
formed better at posttest compared to pretest on all functional mea-
sures and had lower systolic blood pressure at posttest. The control
group improved in lat pull-down and coordination and worsened in
shoulder adduction and agility and balance. The results from
2(group) × 2(test) RM-ANOVAs follow.
 Table 1

100
Means and Standard Deviations for Measures of Functional Fitness

Walking Resistance Training Control

Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest
Variable M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

Upper body strength (pounds)

Lat pull-down 50.8 17.5 61.1** 20.2 55.2 20.0 65.5*** 22.1 46.9 16.5 51.7* 18.9
Chest press 28.1 11.4 37.2** 12.5 32.1 16.2 41.6*** 17.7 30.0 12.6 30.0 16.8
Upper back 45.0 21.1 54.2*** 21.7 48.1 17.7 55.9*** 21.5 42.9 14.7 42.1 14.2
Lower body strength (pounds)
Leg extensions 37.5 21.6 47.1*** 22.7 29.8 20.3 48.3*** 23.0 30.0 17.2 31.7 14.1
Leg curl 51.7 16.3 62.3*** 18.7 45.2 19.1 61.2*** 19.4 39.0 17.2 44.0 16.2
Leg press 176.1 63.5 191.4*** 66.8 183.8 81.9 214.3*** 73.9 138.8 66.9 139.5 68.5
Flexibility test (inches) 18.6 5.4 20.2* 5.0 17.9 3.6 19.5*** 3.8 19.3 5.3 18.5 4.2
Hip flexion (degrees) 103.2 10.2 116.4*** 14.2 102.7 6.4 107.5*** 7.8 103.1 22.1 101.0 20.7
Upper body flexibility (degrees)
Shoulder flexion 138.8 14.2 149.5*** 12.6 142.0 10.0 151.9*** 10.8 146.9 15.9 140.8 30.7
Shoulder adduction 143.7 16.0 150.7*** 15.2 144.4 10.0 153.0*** 10.2 152.0 13.9 138.4* 31.2
Agility and balance (seconds) 49.2 22.0 44.8** 21.6 50.8 22.4 41.4* 12.5 50.3 16.5 58.7** 16.9
Coordination (seconds) 14.9 2.5 12.8** 2.8 15.1 2.7 12.7*** 2.3 15.6 2.9 13.5** 3.4
Blood pressure (mm Hg)
Systolic blood pressure 133 12 128* 9 133 13 124* 11 128 9 129 12
Diastolic blood pressure 68 6 70 4 70 9 68 6 68 8 70 5
Resting heart rate (beats/min) 76 8 76 6 75 6 75 6 73 5 77 12

Note. Paired sample t test statistic was used to calculate pretest to posttest differences in performance.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 101

WALKING GROUP VERSUS CONTROL GROUP

The RM-ANOVAs yielded a significant group-by-test interactions

for upper body strength (F[1, 38] = 11.68, p < .01), lower body
strength (F[1, 38] = 4.54, p < .05), shoulder flexibility (F[1, 38] =
12.41, p < .01), hip flexibility (F[1, 38] = 5.61, p < .05), and agility and
balance (F[1, 38] = 18.46, p < .001). The post hoc Tukey’s test com-
parisons indicated that all significant interactions reflected a perfor-
mance gain of the walking group over the control group between pre-
test and posttest. The most substantial performance gains within the
walking group were in upper body strength (20%), coordination
(14%), lower body strength (12%), and hip flexibility (11%) (see
Figure 1).

RESISTANCE TRAINING GROUP VERSES CONTROL GROUP

The analyses yielded significant group-by-test interactions for

upper body strength (F[1, 41] = 9.85, p < .01), lower body strength
(F[1, 41] = 25.17, p < .001), shoulder flexibility (F[1, 41] = 14.29, p <
.01), agility and balance (F[1, 41] = 17.84, p < .001), and systolic
blood pressure (F[1, 41] = 4.32, p < .05), and a marginally significant
result for resting heart rate (F[1, 41] = 3.87, p = .06). Tukey’s tests
revealed that all results reflected an improvement in the resistance-
training group over the control group. The most substantial perfor-
mance gains within the resistance-training group were observed in the
lower body strength (20%), agility and balance (20%), upper body
strength (17%), and coordination (16%) (see Figure 1).

Discussion

The goal of this study was to examine the effects of walking and
resistance-training exercise on multiple measures of functional fitness
among individuals in advanced old age who were sedentary prior to
the intervention. The main finding was that both types of exercise led
to functional improvement in multiple domains relative to a control
group. These findings provide further evidence for the benefits
of exercise in advanced old age found previously (Fiatarone et al.,
1994). Although our sample included participants with age range
102 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

20

Walking
15
Resistance training
10 Control

5
% improvement

(5)

(10)

(15)

(20)

Agility/balance

Systolic blood
Upper body

Shoulder flexibility

Hip flexibility
Lower body

Coordination

Diastolic blood

Resting heart rate

strength

strength

pressure

pressure
Figure 1. Average pretest to posttest improvement on measures of functional fitness in the
walking, resistance training, and control groups.
Note. Improvement in upper and lower body strength reflects more pounds lifted; improvement
in hip and shoulder flexibility reflects more degrees of range of motion; improvement in agility
and balance and coordination reflects shorter time of exercise completion; improvement on dia-
stolic and systolic blood pressure reflects lower blood pressure; and improvement in resting heart
rate reflects fewer beats per minute. Values in negative show decline.

from 66 to 96 years, only 5 participants (3 in the walking group, none

in the resistance-training group, and 2 in the control group) were less
than 75 years of age. In addition, both exercise programs appeared to
be feasible to sustain, at least for the 16-week duration of the study.
Only 3 out of the 39 participants assigned to the two intervention
groups did not complete the study (10% attrition).
Both walking and resistance training led to substantial improve-
ments in lower and upper body strength. In addition, we found
improved hip and shoulder flexibility as well as agility and balance in
both exercise groups, although these were not part of the intervention.
Flexibility exercises were part of the warm-up routine administered
before each exercise session. Cavani et al. (2002) found similar
improvements in flexibility in a relatively younger cohort after 6
weeks of training with stretching and resistance-training exercises.
Performing quick movements and changes in direction without losing
balance becomes increasingly challenging with age (Bassey et al.,
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 103

1992; Brown, Sinacore, & Host, 1995), potentially leading to higher

incidence of falls (Buchner et al., 1997; Province et al., 1995). There-
fore, the observed improvement in agility and balance may have
important implications for functional ability.
These findings support the notion that the benefits of exercise in
this age group tend to be relatively universal, possibly because of rela-
tively low levels of activity in advanced old age. In addition, it appears
that walking, which requires no special equipment and may be more
accessible to this age group than resistance training, may improve
overall functional fitness in a similar way as resistance training.
A paired-sample t test suggested a significant within-group reduc-
tion in systolic blood pressure in the resistance-training group (see
Table 1). This finding, although only exploratory, may point to a
potentially important health benefit given that systolic blood pressure
is considered a good indicator of sclerotic arterial changes indicative
of cardiovascular disease (e.g., Izzo, Levy, & Black, 2000). Several
previous studies found improvement in cardiovascular health follow-
ing aerobic exercise (Hagerman et al., 2000; Myers, 2003) or resis-
tance training (Harris & Holly, 1987). Possibly, higher intensity or
duration of training in our study may have led to cardiovascular
benefits in the main analyses.
The limitations of this study include the fact that test-retest results
were not available. Additionally, a delayed follow-up would have
been helpful in terms of the implications of our findings for long-term
functional health and a larger sample would improve statistical power.
Future research should examine the potential longer term benefits of
exercise in this age group. Finally, the participants in this study
resided in the same community. Although the participants were
encouraged not to share information about intervention programs dur-
ing the duration of the study, contamination across the control and
intervention groups may have occurred. However, any contamination
within the control group would mean that the results found in this
study only underestimate the effect of intervention.
In conclusion, the findings of this study indicate that previously
sedentary adults in advanced old age can improve their functional fit-
ness by engaging in a supervised exercise program. Both resistance-
training and walking programs yielded improvements on multiple
measures of functional fitness, suggesting that benefits of exercise in
104 JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH / February 2006

advanced old age may be universal rather than specific to the type of
exercise.

REFERENCES

Akima, H., Kano, Y., Enomoto, Y., Ishizu, M., Okada, M., Oishi, Y., et al. (2001). Muscle func-
tion in 164 men and women aged 20-84 yr. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33,
220-226.
American College of Sports Medicine. (1998). The recommended quantity and quality of exer-
cise for developing and maintaining cardiorespitory and muscular fitness in healthy adults.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30, 975-991.
Bassey, E. J., Fiatarone, M. A., O’Neill, E. F., Kelly, M., Evans, W. J., & Lipsitz, L. A. (1992).
Leg extensor power and functional performance in very old men and women. Clinical Sci-
ence, 82, 321-327.
Brandon, L. J., Boyette, L. W., Lloyd, A., & Gaasch, D. A. (2004). Resistive training and long-
term function in older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 11, 10-28.
Brown, M., & Holloszy, J. O. (1993). Effects of walking, jogging and cycling on strength, flexi-
bility, speed and balance in 60- to 72-year olds. Aging—Clinical & Experimental Research,
5, 427-434.
Brown, M., Sinacore, D., & Host, H. H. (1995). The relationship of strength to function in the
older adult. Journal of Gerontology: Biological Sciences, 55A, 55-59.
Buchner, D. M., Cress, M. E., de Lateur, B. J., Esseman, P. C., Margherita, A. J., Price, R., et al.
(1997). The effect of strength and edurance training on gait, balance, fall risk, and health ser-
vices use in community-living older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 52A,
M218-M224.
Campbell, W., Crim, M., Young, V., & Evans, W. (1994). Increased energy requirements and
changes in body composition with resistance training in older adults. American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition, 60, 167-175.
Cavani, V., Mier, C. M., Musto, A. A., & Tummers, N. (2002). Effects of a 6-week resistance-
training program on a functional fitness of older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activ-
ity, 10, 443-452.
Christmas, C., & Andersen, R. A. (2000). Exercise in older patients: Guidelines for the clinician.
Journal of American Geriatrics Society, 48, 318-324.
Fiatarone, M., Marks, E., Ryan, N., Meredith, C., Lipsitz, L., & Evans, W. (1990). High intensity
strength training in nonagenarians. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 3029-
3034.
Fiatarone, M., O’Neill, E., Ryan, N., Clements, K., Solares, G., Nelson, M., et al. (1994). Exer-
cise training and nutritional supplementation for physical frailty in very elderly people. New
England Journal of Medicine, 330, 1769-1775.
Fiatarone, M. A., & Evans, W. J. (1993). The etiology and reversibility of muscle dysfunction in
the aged. Journal of Gerontology, 48, 77-83.
Hagerman, F. C., Walsh, S. J., Staron, R. S., Hikida, R. S., Gilders, R. M., Murray, T. F., et al.
(2000). Effects of high-intensity resistance training on untrained older men. I. Strength, car-
diovascular, and metabolic responses. Journal of Gerontology: Biological Sciences, 55A,
B336-B346.
 Simons, Andel / EXERCISE AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS 105

Hakkinen, K., & Hakkinen, A. (1995). Neuromuscular adaptations during intensive strength
training in middle-aged and elderly males and females. Electromyography and Clinical
Neurophysiology, 35, 137-147.
Hamdorf, P. A., & Penhall, R. K. (1999). Walking with its training effects on the fitness and activ-
ity patterns of 79-91 year old females. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine, 29,
22-28.
Harris, K., & Holly, R. (1987). Physiological response to circuit weight training in borderline
hypertensive subjects. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 10, 246-252.
Hubert, H. B., Bloch, D. A., Oehlert, J. W., & Fries, J. F. (2002). Lifestyle habits and compression
of morbidity. Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 57A, M347-M351.
Hurley, B. F., & Hagberg, J. M. (1998). Optimizing health in older persons: Aerobic or strength
training. Exercise and Sports Sciences Review, 26, 61-89.
Izzo, J. L., Levy, D., & Black, H. R. (2000). Importance of systolic blood pressure in older Ameri-
cans. Hypertension, 35, 1021-1024.
Jette, A. M., & Branch, L. G. (1981). The Framingham disability study: II—Physical disability
among the aging. American Journal of Public Health, 71, 1211-1216.
King, A. C., Rejeski, W. J., & Buchner, D. M. (1998). Physical activity interventions targeting
older adults: Critical review and recommendations. American Journal of Preventive Medi-
cine, 15, 316-333.
Mazzeo, R. S., & Tanaka, H. (2001). Exercise prescription for the elderly: Current recommenda-
tions. Sports Medicine, 31, 809-818.
Myers, J. (2003). Exercise and cardiovascular health. Circulation, 107, e2-e5.
Osness, W. H. (1990). Functional fitness assessment for adults over 60 years: A field based
assessment. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and
Dance.
Province, M. A., Hadley, E. C., Hornbrook, M. C., Lipsitz, L. A., Miller, J. P., Mulrow, C. D.,
et al. (1995). The effects of exercise on falls in the elderly patients: A preplanned meta-
analysis of the FICSIT trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1341-1347.
SAS Institute. (1999a). SAS system for Microsoft Windows, Version 8 [Computer software].
Gary, NC: Author.
SAS Institute. (1999b). SAS/STAT user’s guide, Version 8. Cary, NC: Author.
Spiraduso, W. W. (1995). Physical dimensions of aging. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Taaffe, D. R., Duret, C., Wheeler, S., & Marcus, R. (1999). Once-weekly resistance exercise
improves muscle strength and neuromuscular performance in older adults. Journal of the
American Geriatrics Society, 47, 1208-1214.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1996). Current population reports. Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office.
Van der Bij, A. K., Laurant, M. G. H., & Wensing, M. (2002). Effectiveness of physical activity
interventions for older adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 22, 120-133.
Welton, S. P., Chin, A., Xin, X., & He, J. (2002). Effect of aerobic exercise on blood pressure: A
meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 136, 493-503.
Wong, C. H., Wong, S. F., Pang, W. S., Azizah, Y., & Dass, M. J. (2003). Habitual walking and its
correlation to better physical function: Implication for prevention of physical disability in
older persons. Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 58A, 555-560.