Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Effects of Land versus Water Walking Interventions on Vascular Function in Older Adults.

Medicine and science in sports and exercise
January 1, 2021
Andrew Haynes et al. (10 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to compare the effects of land walking (LW) and water walking (WW) on peripheral artery endothelial function in older sedentary individuals.

Results Summary

The study found that 6 months of LW significantly improved brachial artery endothelial function (flow-mediated dilation) compared to the control group, while WW did not show significant differences. No changes were observed in smooth muscle cell function (glyceryl trinitrate response) in any group.

Population

Sedentary older individuals (mean age 61.9 ± 6.6 years, 23.5% male).

Effective Dosage

3 × 50-minute supervised walking sessions per week.

Duration

24 consecutive weeks.

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (6)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Land walking (LW) training
increase
flow-mediated dilation (brachial artery endothelial function)
sedentary, older individuals
from 5.39% ± 0.71% to 7.77% ± 0.78%
increased
#1
Water walking (WW) training
no change
flow-mediated dilation (brachial artery endothelial function)
sedentary, older individuals
-
no differences in artery dilation response
#2
Land walking (LW) training
no change
smooth muscle cell function (glyceryl trinitrate administration)
sedentary, older individuals
-
no differences in artery dilation response
#3
Water walking (WW) training
no change
smooth muscle cell function (glyceryl trinitrate administration)
sedentary, older individuals
-
no differences in artery dilation response
#4
Control (no exercise)
no change
flow-mediated dilation (brachial artery endothelial function)
sedentary, older individuals
from 5.87% ± 0.73% to 5.78% ± 0.78%
no change
#5
Control (no exercise)
no change
smooth muscle cell function (glyceryl trinitrate administration)
sedentary, older individuals
-
no differences in artery dilation response
#6
Abstract

PURPOSE: Endothelial dysfunction is an early and integral atherogenic event. Interventions that improve endothelial function also reduce cardiovascular risk. Due largely to the direct hemodynamic effects of repetitive exercise on the artery wall, exercise training has shown to enhance endothelial function. Land walking (LW) and water walking (WW) induce distinct hemodynamic responses, so the comparison of their effects provides an approach to study shear stress effects on endothelial function. We hypothesized that LW and WW training would have different effects on peripheral artery endothelial function. METHODS: Fifty-one sedentary, older (age = 61.9 ± 6.6 yr, 23.5% male) individuals were randomized into one of three groups: control (n = 16), or one of two exercise groups consisting of 3 × 50 min supervised and individually tailored walking sessions per week for 24 consecutive weeks, performed either on LW (n = 17) or on WW (n = 18). Brachial artery endothelial function (flow-mediated dilation) and smooth muscle cell function (glyceryl trinitrate administration) were tested in all participants before (week 0) and after (week 24) the intervention. RESULTS: Differences were apparent in flow-mediated dilation change between the LW group (week 0, 5.39% ± 0.71%, to week 24, 7.77% ± 0.78%; P = 0.009) and the control group (week 0, 5.87% ± 0.73%, to week 24, 5.78% ± 0.78%). No differences in artery dilation response were found after glyceryl trinitrate administration (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that 6-month center-based LW may be superior to WW in terms of improvement in arterial endothelial function in older sedentary individuals.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
AgedBrachial ArteryEndothelium, VascularFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, Smooth, VascularNitric OxideVasodilationWalkingWater Sports
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy85/10
Quality90/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations13
Citations/Year3.3
Relative Citation Ratio1.42
NIH Percentile63%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.75
Weight Score2.71
Normalized Score0.72
Related Supplements