The Effects of Force‐Velocity Profile‐Based Load Prescription on Muscle Power and Functional Performance in Velocity‐Deficient Older Adults
- 1Physical Activity, Sports & Health Research Group, Department of Movement Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
- 2Rehabilitation Research Center, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Abstract
Muscle power is essential for functional capacity in older adults and can be improved through power-focused resistance training (PRT). PRT adaptations are load- and velocity-specific, yet optimal load prescription remains unclear. As force and velocity capacities vary between individuals, this 12-week intervention compared two force-velocity (F-V) profile-guided loading strategies: training at loads matched versus not matched to the F-V deficit. F-V profiles of 80 adults ≥ 65 years were assessed on a pneumatic leg press, with maximal force (F₀) and velocity (V₀) expressed as z-scores relative to a younger reference group (n = 60, 20-35 years). A difference ≥ 1 between z-scores was considered indicative of a deficit, with the direction determining a force- or velocity-deficit profile. As force deficits were rare (n = 4), the intervention only included participants with a velocity deficit (n = 59), of whom 57 initiated the intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to train at loads matched to their deficit (individualized; IND) or at loads deliberately not matched to their deficit (non-individualized; NON-IND). Maximal power, F-V profile parameters and functional performance were assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. From baseline to 12 weeks, F₀ increased more in NON-IND than IND (p = 0.040), while V₀ increased more in IND than NON-IND (p = 0.009). Changes in power and functional performance did not differ between groups (all p ≥ 0.065). In velocity-deficient older adults, differences in F-V-guided load prescription led to distinct F-V adaptations but did not lead to differences in power or functional performance. Trial Registration: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06449716).
Related
- Performance of large language models in prescription review: a comparative study
- 166 CARD8- and SRCAP-deficient CAR T-cells promote durable responses and limit functional exhaustion
- Implausible 100-400 m Performance Times and Inadequate Testing Distances Compromise the Estimation and Interpretation of Critical Velocity. Comment on Amara et al. Relationships Between Dry-Land Load-Velocity Parameters and In-Water Bioenergetic Performance in Competitive Swimmers. Sports 2026, 14, 11.
- Clinical, Functional, and Radiological Profile of Patients With Spondyloarthritis: A Cross-Sectional Study From a Tertiary Care Center in Central India
- Analytical Agreement and Diagnostic Performance of a Commercial Point-of-Care Lipid Testing System for Lipid Profile and Atherogenic Ratios
BibTeX
@article{deboutte2026effects,
title = {{The Effects of Force‐Velocity Profile‐Based Load Prescription on Muscle Power and Functional Performance in Velocity‐Deficient Older Adults}},
author = {Jolien Deboutte and Christophe Delecluse and Martine Thomis and Evelien Van Roie},
journal = {Scandinavian journal of medicine \& science in sports},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1111/sms.70392},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13717707},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - The Effects of Force‐Velocity Profile‐Based Load Prescription on Muscle Power and Functional Performance in Velocity‐Deficient Older Adults
AU - Jolien Deboutte
AU - Christophe Delecluse
AU - Martine Thomis
AU - Evelien Van Roie
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports
DO - 10.1111/sms.70392
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13717707
AB - Muscle power is essential for functional capacity in older adults and can be improved through power-focused resistance training (PRT). PRT adaptations are load- and velocity-specific, yet optimal load prescription remains unclear. As force and velocity capacities vary between individuals, this 12-week intervention compared two force-velocity (F-V) profile-guided loading strategies: training at loads matched versus not matched to the F-V deficit. F-V profiles of 80 adults ≥ 65 years were assessed on a pneumatic leg press, with maximal force (F₀) and velocity (V₀) expressed as z-scores relative to a younger reference group (n = 60, 20-35 years). A difference ≥ 1 between z-scores was considered indicative of a deficit, with the direction determining a force- or velocity-deficit profile. As force deficits were rare (n = 4), the intervention only included participants with a velocity deficit (n = 59), of whom 57 initiated the intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to train at loads matched to their deficit (individualized; IND) or at loads deliberately not matched to their deficit (non-individualized; NON-IND). Maximal power, F-V profile parameters and functional performance were assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. From baseline to 12 weeks, F₀ increased more in NON-IND than IND (p = 0.040), while V₀ increased more in IND than NON-IND (p = 0.009). Changes in power and functional performance did not differ between groups (all p ≥ 0.065). In velocity-deficient older adults, differences in F-V-guided load prescription led to distinct F-V adaptations but did not lead to differences in power or functional performance. Trial Registration: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06449716).
SN - 0905-7188
SN - 1600-0838
ER -