 |
| |
| Study | Population | Intervention | Duration | Health related measures | Functional fitness measures | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hajihasani et al. ( |
Diabetes Type 2 (n = 28) mean age 51.79 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric Exercise (Running on treadmill with ramp slop controlled for – 4°) n= 14 Intervention 2: Concentric Exercise (Running on treadmill with ramp slop controlled for + 4°) n = 14 |
Eight weeks | N/A | 6MWT, TUG |
Eccentric and concentric exercises significantly decreased the result of TUG. There was a significant difference in 6MWT b/w concentric and eccentric groups (P = 0.036), although, in both groups, the distance walked increased after the intervention. |
| Chen et al. ( |
Elderly Obese Women Women (n = 30) Mean age 66 |
Intervention 1: Descending stair walking. n = 15 Intervention 2: Ascending stair walking. n = 15 |
12 weeks (2 sessions x week) |
HbA1C HOMA OGTT Lipids HR |
6MWT, MVCiso, 30-s chair stand, 8-ft up-and-go, 2-min step, and 6-m Tandem walk |
Decreases in serum triacylglycerols, total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterols, glucose, insulin, HOMA, HbA1c, and increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterols were greater (P < 0.05) after Descending Stair Walking (DSW) than Ascending Stair Walking (ASW). MVCiso increased greater for DSW (34%) than ASW (15%). Physical fitness improved for both groups; however, the 30-s chair stand and 6MWT showed greater improvement for DSW than ASW |
| Chen et al. |
Healthy Elderly Men (n = 26) Mean age 66 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on Leg extension machine, 30-60 contractions of knee extensors once a week, intensity progressively increased from 10-100% of 1 RM. n = 13 Intervention 2: Concentric training of knee extensors on the same device with intensity increased from 50 – 100% of 1 RM. n = 13 |
12 weeks (1 session x week) |
HbA1C HOMA OGTT Lipids |
1 RM, MVCcon MVCiso, 6MWT, 30-s chair stand (CS), 2-m step (2MS), 8-foot up-and-go (8UG), one-leg stand with eyes open (OLST), 6-meter tandem walk (6-mTW) |
Functional physical fitness (e.g., 30-s chair stand) and maximal concentric contraction strength of the knee extensors increased greater (P ≤ 0.05) after Eccentric training than concentric training. HOMA, OGTT and HbA1c showed improvement in insulin sensitivity only after eccentric training (P ≤ 0.05). Greater (P ≤ 0.05) decreases in fasting TG, TC, and LDLC were evident after eccentric training than concentric training, and HDLC increased only after eccentric training. |
| Regnersgaard et al. ( |
Healthy men and women (n=21) Mean age 70 |
Intervention 1: Descending stair walking. N = 07 Intervention 2: Ascending stair walking. N = 07 Intervention 3: Descending stair walking with carrying additional weight. N = 07 |
3 weeks or 6 weeks (3 sessions x week) | Leg muscle mass (kg), Thigh muscle mass, calf muscle mass, calf circumference, 6MWT, Sit to stand test (Chair stand test), power-CST, relative power-CST (W/kg), leg press 3RM (kg), leg extension power (W) |
Leg muscle mass increased more in eccentric + (+0.29 ± 0.09 kg) vs concentric (+0.08 ± 0.05 kg) (P<0.05) but not different from eccentric (+0.16 ± 0.06 kg). The 6MWT increased after 6 weeks more (P<0.05) in eccentric + (+85 ± 23 m) compared with eccentric (+37 ± 13 m) and concentric (+27 ± 12 m). Leg press (3 RM) was higher (P=0.028) after training with no possible distinction between training groups. |
|
| Drexel et al. ( |
Healthy sedentary people Men (n = 14) Women (n = 28) Mean age 48 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training (Hiking Downwards) n=23 Intervention 2: Concentric training (Hiking upwards) n=22 |
8 weeks (3-5 sessions x week) |
HOMA Lipids Glucose |
N/A | Eccentric exercise significantly lowered insulin resistance, fasting serum insulin, and the HOMA index of insulin resistance. An improvement in glucose tolerance was seen after both eccentric and concentric exercise but only the difference obtained by eccentric exercise reached statistical significance. TC, apolipoprotein B, and the apo B/apo A1 ratio were decreased by both. |
| Duncan et al. ( |
Healthy men (n = 48) Mean age 24 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on KIN-COM Dynamometer (10 reps x session, Intensity = MVC) n=16 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device (10 reps x session, Intensity = MVC) n=14 Control: No exercise performed. n=18 |
6 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Eccentric strength, concentric strength |
Eccentric and concentric training improved eccentric and concentric strength respectively, and gains after eccentric training were more mode specific. |
| Franchi et al. ( |
Young male (n = 12) Mean age 25 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on the leg press machine. (4 sets of 8-10 reps at 80% of eccentric 1RM) n=06 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device. (4 sets of 8-10 reps at 80% of CON 1RM) n=06 |
10 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | MVCiso, 1-RM |
Similar increases in muscle volume (+6% eccentric and +8% concentric) and in MVCiso (+11% eccentric and +9%) were found after training among both groups. |
| Gault et al. ( |
Healthy adults (n = 24) Mean age 67 |
Intervention 1: Downhill walking on a treadmill (30 min, -10% decline, self-selected walking speed). N=13 Intervention 2: Level walking on a treadmill (30 min at self-selected walking speed). N=11 |
12 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Concentric strength, Eccentric strength, 5-RSTS, maximal walking speed (MWS), TUG, dynamic strength |
Improvements in 5-RSTS, MWS and TUG was substantial and similar for both groups. 5-RSTS improved by 32 and 34% in LTW and DTW. TUG improved by 22% for both groups. Peak eccentric and concentric torque did not change. |
| Hortobagyi et al. ( |
Sedentary Women (n = 42) Mean age 21 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on KIN-CON dynamometer, (4 sets of 6-10 reps) n=14 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device and parameters n=14 Control: No exercise performed. n=14 |
6 weeks (4 sessions x week) |
N/A | concentric strength, eccentric strength, Isometric strength |
Eccentric training improved isometric strength significantly (P < 0.05) more than concentric training. Eccentric training improved concentric strength by 14% (P > 0.05) and increased eccentric strength significantly (P < 0.05) more than concentric training increased concentric strength. |
| Hortobagyi et al. ( |
Sedentary Men (n = 21) Mean age 21 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on KIN-CON dynamometer (Almost 50 reps x session, Intensity = MVC) n=07 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device and parameters. n=08 Control: No exercise performed. n=06 |
12 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
concentric strength, eccentric strength, Isometric strength |
Eccentric training increased eccentric strength 3.5 times more (pre/post 46%, P < 0.05) than concentric training increased concentric strength (pre/post 13%). Eccentric training increased concentric strength and Concentric training increased eccentric strength by about the same magnitude (5 and 10%, respectively, P > 0.05). | |
| Kudiarasu et al.( |
Adults with T2DM (n=18) Mean age |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on Cybex. Exercises included chest press, lateral pulldown, bicep curl, triceps extension, leg extension, leg curl, calf raise, abdominal crunch (2–3 sets of 10 eccentric-only for 5 s) n=09 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device (2–3 sets of 10 concentric-only (1-2 s). n=09 |
12 weeks (2 sessions x week) |
plasma glucose, serum insulin, HbA1c, Lipids, HOMA |
muscle strength, 6MWT, chair rise test, TUG |
No significant changes in blood biomarkers were found for both groups. One-repetition maximal strength of each exercise increased (p < 0.05) for both eccentric (12–37%) and concentric (27–68%). Both groups improved (p < 0.05) 6MWT distance and chair rise time but only eccentric improved (p < 0.05) the TUG. |
| Lewis et al. ( |
Middle-aged male (n=17) Mean age 42 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric cycling at 60% peak concentric workload. N= 09 Intervention 2: Concentric cycling. N=08 |
8 weeks (2 sessions x week) |
N/A | 6RM MVIC |
Both groups significantly increased 6RM and MVIC relative to their baseline (P < 0.05). Therefore, improved leg strength was equivalent between concentric and eccentric groups. |
| Miller et al. ( |
Healthy Women (n =38) Mean age 20 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on Iso-kinetic Dynamometer, Intensity=MVC. n= 17 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device and parameters. n=21 |
20 week (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Isokinetic Strength | Eccentric training increased eccentric knee extension and flexion peak torque more than concentric training. |
| Nickols-Richardson et al. ( |
Healthy Women (n = 70) Mean age 20 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on Isokinetic Dynamometer (30 reps x session, Intensity = MVC). n=33 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device and parameters. n=37 |
20 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Concentric peak torque (Nm) Eccentric peak torque (Nm) |
Muscular strength (peak torque) of the trained leg was significantly higher after training in both the concentric (18.6%) and eccentric (28.9%) training groups |
| Pavone and Moffat ( |
Healthy Women (n = 27) Mean age 29 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on Cybex II Isokinetic Dynamometer, 30 reps x session, Intensity=% 1RM Eccentric. N=11 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device. 30 repetitions per session, Intensity=% 1RM Con. n=08 Intervention 3: Isometric training on the same device by holding the load at 60 of knee flexion. N=08 |
6 week (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | MVCiso | Significant strength gain was achieved through concentric, eccentric, and isometric training. No one method of training is superior to other. |
| Raue ( |
Healthy sedentary male (n = 15) Mean age 23 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric exercise training on knee extensor device Cybex (4 sets of 8 reps, Intensity = starting at 80% of 1 RM Con). n=06 Intervention 2: Concentric exercise training on the same device and parameters. n=06 Control: No exercise training. n=03 |
4 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Knee extensors strength | Concentric training increased knee extensor strength by 19% (p <0.05)—no difference in knee extensor strength pre to post-training for eccentric or Control group. |
| Rodio and Fattorini ( |
Healthy young adults Women (n = 28) Mean age 26 |
Intervention 1: Level walking on a treadmill (30 min at 1 m/s). n=07 Intervention 2: Uphill walking on a treadmill (30 min, +20% incline, 0.75m/s). n=08 Intervention 3: Downhill walking on a treadmill (30 min, -20% decline, 1.36m/s). n=07 Intervention 4: Mixed walking on a treadmill (+20% incline, 0.75 m/s, 15 min and -20% decline, 1.36m/s, 15 min). n=06 |
6 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | MVCiso | In all groups, strength values were increased from baseline to post-intervention but resulted in statistically different only in the Downhill walking group. |
| Tomberlin et al. ( |
Healthy people Men (n = 31) Women (n = 32) Mean age 27 |
Intervention 1: Eccentric training on KIN-COM Dynamometer. n=21 Intervention 2: Concentric training on the same device. N=19 Control: no exercise performed. n=23 |
6 weeks (3 sessions x week) |
N/A | Concentric peak torque (Nm) Eccentric peak torque (Nm) |
Eccentric and concentric training increased eccentric and concentric strength respectively. |
| Zeppetzauer et al. ( |
healthy sedentary Men (n = 16) Women (n = 29) Mean age 48 |
Intervention 1: Hiking downwards (eccentric training) on 540 meters trial. n=22 Intervention 2: Hiking upwards (Concentric exercise) on the same path. n=23 |
8 weeks (3-5 sessions x week) |
Lipids Glucose Creatine kinase CRP Heart Rate |
N/A | Eccentric training improved glucose tolerance (AUC) per unit of energy expenditure significantly more than concentric training. The decrease of LDLC per kilocalorie spent was significantly stronger with eccentric exercise. |