SOURCES: American College of Sports Medicine web site. Michael R. Bracko, EdD, FACSM, chairman, American College of Sports Medicine's Consumer Information Committee. Rita Redberg, MSc, chairwoman, American Heart Association's Scientific Advisory Board for the Choose to Move program. Cedric Bryant, PhD, chief exercise physiologist, American Council on Exercise. Stephanie Siegrist, MD, orthopedic surgeon, Rochester, N.Y. Sal Fichera, exercise physiologist; owner, Forza Fitness, New York.
Around thirty years ago, Andersen et al.  developed a novel exercise model (i.e. one leg dynamic exercise, OLDE) allowing dynamic isotonic contractions of the knee extensor muscles. This exercise model isolates the knee extensor muscles via an active knee extension and passive knee flexion, and due to the reduced muscle mass involved, this exercise is not limited by cardiorespiratory function . Therefore, this model was extensively used to investigate the effect of OLDE on the cardiorespiratory system (e.g. ), skeletal muscle physiology (e.g. ) but also with patients suffering from cardiorespiratory limitations [14, 15] or for studying mechanisms regulating circulatory response to rhythmic dynamic exercise [6, 16]. More recently, high intensity OLDE has been used to investigate CNS processes involved in the regulation of muscle fatigue and endurance performance [8, 11, 17, 18]. Despite being recently used to investigate muscle endurance, the reliability of high intensity OLDE has not been tested. Reliability can be defined as the consistency of a performance measure, and should be established for any new measurement tool [19, 20]. Furthermore, reliability of a protocol can be used to estimate the sample size required for an appropriate statistical power . The main aim of this study was to establish the reliability of high intensity OLDE as a measure of muscle endurance. Additionally, as the sensitivity of a protocol reflects its ability to detect small changes in performance, we also calculated the smallest worthwhile change as a measure of sensitivity .
This is a lift that builds full-body power and tests the ability to move quickly. HOW TO DO IT: Start with the bar on the ground. Place your hands on the bar -- a little outside of your shins -- with the bar touching your mid shin. You should keep your weight on your heels with your chest big and pull the bar up like a deadlift, while driving the knees back so that the bar path stays perpendicular to the floor and you stay over the bar. This utilizes your hip hinge and activates your posterior chain. Once the bar passes the knees, you jump up (you may not actually leave the ground, but you should feel like you’re trying to) and shrug so that the bar comes as high as possible. The next step is for you to get under the bar or “catch” it as quickly as possible by squatting under the bar and changing the hand position underneath the bar, putting the body into a front squat position with the bar resting on the shoulders. You then stand the bar up. MUSCLES USED: Glutes, quads, hamstring, calves, shoulders, core and traps.
2) Another critique related to safety (and one that betrays my affection for yoga) is the BREATH is not emphasized nearly enough. Breath and movement go hand in hand with yoga. This helps give much needed oxygen to the tissues when their demands are the highest, but it also helps the person move with the body instead of jerking the body into cranked up positions. I believe this is another spot that could contribute to injuries.
DC-based personal trainer Chris Perrin says to do hip bridges if you want to get your derriere round and toned. “Lie on the floor. With bent legs, place both feet flat on the floor. Both arms down, hands on each side of your hips,” he explains. “Raise your low back off the floor by pushing through the heels of the feet. Once your hips are at their highest point—without straining your back—pause and return your lower back to the floor.” And squeeze those glutes the entire time!
Brovold et al.  supposed the importance of an exercise is based on a high-intensity and continuous monitoring model because in their research a nonmonitored home-based group did not improve their physical fitness as much as the monitored group that accomplished a high-intensity aerobic exercise adjusted by means of the Borg Scale and a musical pace . However, Brovold et al. , despite an exercise protocol with a high-intensity aerobic interval (HIA), found a small effect on SFT. This may be due to the fact that the exercise protocol used by Brovold et al.  did not interact favorably with the skills tested by SFT. Thus, a positive relationship among vigorous physical exercise  or HIA exercise  and the functional abilities tested by the SFT is not fully evident. On the contrary, the vigorous exercise protocol used here enhanced 5 out of 6 of the SFT and seems to be more focused than the aforementioned one. The small effect of vigorous physical exercise through the 8-foot up and go test is not fully clear and may depend on several factors: (i) a large standard deviation at T0 due to the presence of two subjects who showed a very low functional capacity; (ii) inadequacy of the exercises to improve this ability; and/or (iii) inadequate sensitivity of an 8-foot up and go test. In a recent study by Furtado et al.  conducted on a large number of elderly females, even though the SFT was used at baseline and after 8 months from an intervention program of multimodal exercise training (3 days per week), not all skills tested were found improved. However, according to a meta-analysis  that included 18 different exercise studies, even a small positive effect can be considered to be of great value in this group of individuals who are at risk of further functional decline. In conclusion, the present study shows that vigorous physical exercise in healthy elderly people provides significant improvements in the majority of the different skills assessed by the SFT.
The VE group consisted of 8 women and 12 men (age 69.6 ± 3.9 years; weight 70.7 ± 12.1 kg; height 161.3 ± 6.9 cm). The control group consisted of 6 women and 14 men (age 71.2 ± 3.7 years; weight 76.1 ± 12.3 kg; height 167.5 ± 9.8 cm). Only 20 subjects of the VE group and 8 of the control group correctly completed the trials (see Figure 1 and Limitation of the Study paragraph). Adherence to protocol of the VE group was checked daily by our motor scientist by means of a daily record where he noted the week and participation number, the mean HR of the sessions, the type of exercises, and the number of repetitions per set carried out. During the training period, no adverse events such as dizziness, musculoskeletal pain, or cardiovascular issues were recorded. After 12 weeks, there were significant improvements in strength, flexibility, balance, and agility tested by SFT. T0-T1 differences are shown in Figures Figures22 and and3.3. Namely, 5 tests out of 6 showed significant improvement: Chair Stand (T0 12.4 ± 2.4; T1 13.5 ± 2.6, p < 0.01), Arm Curl (T0 14.2 ± 3.6; T1 16.6 ± 3.6, p < 0.01), 2 min step (T0 98.2 ± 15.7; T1 108.9 ± 16.2, p < 0.01), Chair Sit-and-Reach (T0 −9.9 ± 7.7 cm; T1 1.7 ± 6.3 cm, p < 0.01), and Back Scratch (T0 −15.8 ± 10.9 cm; T1 −8.4 ± 13.1 cm, p < 0.01). Conversely, the 8-foot up and go test (T0 6.5 ± 7.6 sec; T1 4.5 ± 0.6 sec, p > 0.05) showed no significant statistical difference due to a high SD in T0 assessment.