↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of resistance training in adult McArdle patients: clinical outcomes and muscle strength and mass benefits

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Feasibility of resistance training in adult McArdle patients: clinical outcomes and muscle strength and mass benefits
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00334
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alfredo Santalla, Diego Munguía-Izquierdo, Lidia Brea-Alejo, Itziar Pagola-Aldazábal, Jorge Díez-Bermejo, Steven J. Fleck, Ignacio Ara, Alejandro Lucia

Abstract

We analyzed the effects of a 4-month resistance (weight lifting) training program followed by a 2-month detraining period in 7 adult McArdle patients (5 female) on: muscle mass (assessed by DXA), strength, serum creatine kinase (CK) activity and clinical severity. Adherence to training was ≥84% in all patients and no major contraindication or side effect was noted during the training or strength assessment sessions. The training program had a significant impact on total and lower extremities' lean mass (P < 0.05 for the time effect), with mean values increasing with training by +855 g (95% confidence interval (CI): 30, 1679) and +547 g (95%CI: 116, 978), respectively, and significantly decreasing with detraining. Body fat showed no significant changes over the study period. Bench press and half-squat performance, expressed as the highest value of average muscle power (W) or force (N) in the concentric-repetition phase of both tests showed a consistent increase over the 4-month training period, and decreased with detraining. Yet muscle strength and power detraining values were significantly higher than pre-training values, indicating that a training effect was still present after detraining. Importantly, all the participants, with no exception, showed a clear gain in muscle strength after the 4-month training period, e.g., bench press: +52 W (95% CI: 13, 91); half-squat: +173 W (95% CI: 96, 251). No significant time effect (P > 0.05) was noted for baseline or post strength assessment values of serum CK activity, which remained essentially within the range reported in our laboratory for McArdle patients. All the patients changed to a lower severity class with training, such that none of them were in the highest disease severity class (3) after the intervention and, as such, they did not have fixed muscle weakness after training. Clinical improvements were retained, in all but one patient, after detraining, such that after detraining all patients were classed as class 1 for disease severity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Researcher 8 9%
Professor 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 27 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 17 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 33 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 October 2023.
All research outputs
#14,395,801
of 24,561,012 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,258
of 5,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,180
of 371,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#26
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,561,012 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,276 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 371,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 50% of its contemporaries.