Exercise programs strengthened breathing muscles in older adults
A 10-week randomized trial in 34 adults aged 65–80 compared limb-strength or breathing-muscle training, each combined with step aerobics.
Our read
Interventions- Studied:
- Randomized trial in 34 people (10 weeks)
- What changed:
- Breathing-in muscle strength increased after inspiratory muscle training plus aerobics compared with before training
- The catch:
- Neither exercise program was compared with a non-intervention control group
- In the record:
- The 38th paper on inspiratory muscle training with results in people; 66 on record in all.
Editor of record: Boris Djordjevic · AgingResearch.News
Thirty-four independently living adults aged 65–80 entered a randomized trial comparing limb resistance exercises with breathing-muscle training for 10 weeks. Resistance loads were 60–80% of the heaviest weight participants could lift once. Breathing resistance was 60–80% of baseline maximum inhalation pressure, with 30 breaths daily, six days weekly. Both groups also did 15–20 minutes of step aerobics twice weekly at 50–70% of maximum heart rate.
Among 32 completers, both groups walked farther in six minutes. Limb training improved exhalation strength and quality-of-life ratings concerning sensory abilities. Breathing training improved inhalation strength and ratings concerning death and dying. The only statistically significant difference between groups favored breathing training on the death-and-dying ratings. Participants reported no intervention-related adverse effects. Two withdrew for personal reasons.
Why it matters
The trial addressed how exercise programs might support physical function and quality of life as people age.
Caveats
Both groups exercised, so the trial could not separate strength training’s effects from step aerobics or changes over time; the analysis included only 32 completers. Participants were aged 65–80, and the trial excluded current smokers and people with severe heart or lung disease.
From the paper
- Participants
To account for potential participant dropouts, the sample size was increased by 10%, resulting in a total of 34 participants.
- Harms
The participants reported no intervention-related adverse effects during the study.
- Limitation
First, the relatively small sample size and single-center recruitment may limit the generalizability of our findings to the broader geriatric population.
Quoted word for word from the full text on PubMed Central.
The paper
Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi; Biruni University
Medicine, Jun 5, 2026, Open access
Comments
Be the first to comment.