↓ Skip to main content

Whole-body electromyostimulation and protein supplementation favorably affect sarcopenic obesity in community-dwelling older men at risk: the randomized controlled FranSO study

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Whole-body electromyostimulation and protein supplementation favorably affect sarcopenic obesity in community-dwelling older men at risk: the randomized controlled FranSO study
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2017
DOI 10.2147/cia.s137987
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wolfgang Kemmler, Anja Weissenfels, Marc Teschler, Sebastian Willert, Michael Bebenek, Mahdieh Shojaa, Matthias Kohl, Ellen Freiberger, Cornel Sieber, Simon von Stengel

Abstract

Sarcopenic obesity (SO) is a geriatric syndrome characterized by the disproportion between the amount of lean mass and fat mass. Exercise decreases fat and maintains muscle mass; however, older people fail to exercise at doses sufficient to affect musculoskeletal and cardiometabolic risk factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS), a time-efficient, joint-friendly and highly individualized exercise technology, on sarcopenia and SO in older men. A total of 100 community-dwelling northern Bavarian men aged ≥70 years with sarcopenia and obesity were randomly (1-1-1) assigned to either 16 weeks of 1) WB-EMS and protein supplementation (WB-EMS&P), 2) isolated protein supplementation or 3) nonintervention control. WB-EMS consisted of 1.5×20 min (85 Hz, 350 µs, 4 s of strain to 4 s of rest) applied with moderate-to-high intensity while moving. We further generated a daily protein intake of 1.7-1.8 g/kg/body mass per day. The primary study end point was Sarcopenia Z-Score, and the secondary study end points were body fat rate (%), skeletal muscle mass index (SMI) and handgrip strength. Intention-to-treat analysis determined a significantly favorable effect of WB-EMS&P (P<0.001) and protein (P=0.007) vs control. Both groups significantly (P<0.001) lost body fat (WB-EMS&P: 2.1%; protein: 1.1%) and differed significantly (P≤0.004) from control (0.3%). Differences between WB-EMS&P and protein were significant for the Sarcopenia Z-Score (P=0.39) and borderline nonsignificant (P=0.051) for body fat. SMI increased significantly in both groups (P<0.001 and P=0.043) and decreased significantly in the control group (CG; P=0.033); differences between the verum groups and control were significant (P≤0.009). Handgrip strength increased in the WB-EMS group (1.90 kg; P<0.001; P=0.050 vs control) only. No adverse effects of WB-EMS or protein supplementation were recorded. WB-EMS&P is a safe and efficient method for tackling sarcopenia and SO in older men. However, the suboptimum effect on functional parameters should be addressed by increased voluntary activation during WB-EMS application.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 21%
Unspecified 9 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 14 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 27%
Sports and Recreations 11 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 4 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,463,973
of 12,650,278 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#538
of 1,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,463
of 269,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#19
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,650,278 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.