Sources used in this document:

All four of the studies were designed to look at how the populations could be helped when a regular exercise program was used. There was also a comparison with the original ability of the group studied before and after the exercise program was used.

Exercise programs that lasted six months were the norm as far as length, but the type of exercise completed was a major difference between the four studies. It has long been debated among exercise experts what the best type of exercise is for increased flexibility and mobility. Studies have been conducted which looked at the benefits of cardiovascular exercises (Fisher, Atler, & Potts, 2007; Stathi & Simey, 2007; Wallmann, et al., 2009) versus the benefits of a weight-bearing regimen (Littbrand, et al., 2009). The reason for this divergence of thought is that one type of exercise offers stretching and improvement of lung and heart function, while the other focuses more on strengthening the muscle so that it adds the above benefits plus. It is necessary for researchers to look into how all types of exercise might work with a given population because there may be a benefit from one type of exercise that is not inherent in the other. It might be that weight-bearing exercises will work better for this population because they have allowed muscles to atrophy over time (Littbrand, et al., 2009). However, other researchers work with the hypothesis that strengthening exercises will not be as effective for a group of participants who have lost a significant amount of muscle mass. The outcomes will hopefully determine which hypothesis is correct.

Outcomes are generally vague because all variables cannot be controlled for in a given experiment. This is the case with this group of four studies. The sample size issue was a problem for three of the studies, so they had what was considered inconclusive data. It is interesting to note that people in the population studied have other issues facing them which tend to skew results. The study with the largest number of cases (199) had a 54% incidence of dementia among its participants (Littbrand, et al., 2009). This variable effectively worked to skew the final data, but it is necessary to determine if participants who have dementia are less able to effect positive results. In the end, all of the studies had mixed results. Some (Littbrand, et al., 2009; Wallmann, et al., 2009) had very good initial results, but these decreased as the participants used the program. In the other two studies, Fisher, Atler and Potts (2007) found that their intervention had no effect on the eventual health of the individuals, while Stahi and Simey (2007) had very good results. The study done by Stahi and Simey (2007) also produced a variable that the researchers were not