Menu
Enrolling by invitation NCT06718699

Accuracy of Prediction Equations to Calculate Maximum Strength

— Observational Healthy Aging

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: resistance exercise tests.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Healthy Aging. Basic parameters: 18 years — 85 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Germany
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →

Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →

Official title

Accuracy of a New Prediction Equation to Calculate One Repetition Maximum (1RM) in Trained and Untrained Young and Old Adults

Overview

Resistance exercise training (RT) is a key component of health related exercise programs. However, an accurate specification of RT load prescription is essential for effective and safe achievement of training aims. Proper specification of exercise intensity might be the most critical issue when designing RT protocols for adults. One repetition maximum tests (1RM) have been considered the "gold standard" of dynamic maximum strength evaluation. Although the argument of increased risk of injuries and adverse effects with 1RM testing in older people has been rejected by several studies , limited motivation to lift maximum loads, requirement for high test effort, time constraints, and interruption of the continuity of the training process aggravate the frequent application of 1RM tests particularly in non-athletic RT. 1RM prediction equations that use the load and number of repetitions completed to fatigue (RTF) to predict repetition maximum might be a reliable and feasible option to 1RM testing. Thus, the primary aims of this study were to evaluate the predictive accuracy of current RTF equations and to develop an equation that more accurately predicts 1RM from RTF tests.

Interventions

  • Other resistance exercise tests
    One 1RM and three RTF tests (5-8RM, 9-12RM, 13-16RM) on seven resistance training devices

Primary outcome measures

  • Maximum load, one repetition maximum, leg press [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
Secondary outcome measures (12)
  • Maximum load lifted at 5-8RM, leg press [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 9-12RM, leg press [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 13-16 RM, leg press [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load, one repetition maximum, lat pulls [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 5-8 RM, lat pulls [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 9-12 RM, lat pulls [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 13-16 RM, lat pulls [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load, one repetition maximum, triceps dips [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 5-8 RM, triceps dips [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 9-12 RM, triceps dips [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load lifted at 13-16 RM, triceps dips [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]
  • Maximum load, one repetition maximum, trunk extension [Time frame: At baseline - no follow up tests]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • 18 to 35 years old
  • 60 to 85 years old

Exclusion criteria

  • Contraindication for one repetition maximum tests
  • musculoskeletal injuries that may prevent a reliable and safe assessment of the 1RM and RTF tests

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Observational model
Cohort

Study locations

Germany · 1 center
  • Institute of Radiology, University Hospital NErlangen — Erlangen

Identifiers

NCT: NCT06718699 · PREDEQ · Physiomed ID 101

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗