Osteoporosis International

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 248–251

Former exercisers of an 18-month intervention display residual aBMD benefits compared with control women 3.5 years post-intervention: a follow-up of a randomized controlled high-impact trial

  • S. Kontulainen
  • A. Heinonen
  • P. Kannus
  • M. Pasanen
  • H. Sievänen
  • I. Vuori
Original Article

Abstract

Exercise is recommended to enhance bone health but data on the maintenance of the exercise-induced bone benefit is sparse. The purpose of the study was to assess the maintenance of the musculoskeletal benefits obtained in an 18-month intervention of high-impact exercise in premenopausal women (34 former trainees and 31 controls). Physical performance and areal bone mineral density (aBMD, g/cm2) were measured at baseline, after 18 months, and after 5 years. All significant 18-month improvements relative to controls in the trainees’ neuromuscular performance (isometric leg press, and vertical jump with and without additional 10% weight of the body mass) had been lost at the 5-year follow-up. However, since the changes in aBMD in both former trainees and controls by time were similar, the exercise-induced aBMD gain (i.e. the mean statistically significant intergroup differences of 1–3% in favor of the trainees) was maintained at the femoral neck, distal femur, patella, proximal tibia, and calcaneus at the 5-year follow-up. At lumbar spine, the difference was 1.7% at both 18-month and at the 5-year follow-ups but the difference was not statistically significant (NS) in the latter follow-up. At the trochanter and unloaded distal radius, the intergroup aBMD differences were NS at both the 18-month and 5-year follow-ups. In conclusion, the bone sites aBMD increased in response to the 18-month intervention, also demonstrated maintenance of this gain 3.5 years after the intervention. In contrast, the exercise-induced improvements in the neuromuscular performance vanished during the post intervention follow-up. These findings suggest the possibility of long-term bone benefits of high-impact training in women.

Keywords

Areal bone mineral density (aBMD) Detraining Exercise Osteoporosis Prevention 

References

  1. 1.
    NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy (2001) Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. JAMA 285:785–795PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heinonen A, Oja P, Kannus P, Sievänen H, Haapasalo H, Mänttäri A, Vuori I (1995) Bone mineral density in female athletes representing sports with different loading characteristics of the skeleton. Bone 17:197–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dalsky GP, Stocke KS, Ehsani AA, Slatopolsky E, Lee WC, Birge JS (1988) Weight-bearing exercise training and lumbar bone mineral content in postmenopausal women. Ann Int Med 108:824–828Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Winters KM, Snow CM (2000) Detraining reverses positive effects of exercise on the musculoskeletal system in premenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 15:2495–2503PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Iwamoto J, Takeda T, Ichimura S (2001) Effect of exercise training and detraining on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. J Orthop Sci 6:128–132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karlsson MK, Johnell O, Obrant KJ (1995) Is bone mineral density advantage maintained long-term in previous weight lifters? Calcif Tissue Int 57:352–328Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karlsson MK, Hasserius R, Obrant KJ (1996) Bone mineral density in athletes during and after career: a comparison between loaded and unloaded skeletal regions. Calcif Tissue Int 59:245–248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lindholm C, Hagenfeldt K, Ringertz H (1995) Bone mineral content of young female former gymnasts. Acta Paediatr 84:1109–1112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kirchner EM, Lewis RD, O’Connor PJ (1996) Effect of past gymnastic participation on adult bone mass. J Appl Physiol 80:226–232Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khan KM, Green RM, Saul A, Bennell KL, Crichton KJ, Hopper JL, Wark JD (1996) Retired elite female ballet dancers and nonathletic controls have similar bone mineral density at weightbearing sites. J Bone Miner Res 11:1566–1574PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khan KM, Bennell KL, Hopper JL, Flicker L, Nowson CA, Sherwin AJ, Crichton KJ, Harcourt PR, Wark JD (1998) Self-reported ballet classes undertaken at age 10–12 years and hip bone mineral density in later life. Osteoporos Int 8:165–173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bass S, Pearce G, Bradney M, Hendrich E, Delmas PD, Harding A, Seeman E (1998) Exercise before puberty may confer residual benefits in bone density in adulthood: studies in active prepubertal and retired female gymnasts. J Bone Miner Res 13:500–507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kontulainen S, Kannus P, Haapasalo H, Heinonen A, Sievänen H, Oja P, Vuori I (1999) Changes in bone mineral content with decreased training in competitive young adult tennis players and controls: a prospective 4-yr follow-up. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31:646–652PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kontulainen S, Kannus P, Haapasalo H, Sievänen H, Heinonen A, Oja P, Vuori I (2001) Good maintenance of exercise-induced bone gain with decreased training of female tennis and squash players. J Bone Miner Res 16:195–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heinonen A, Kannus P, Sievänen H, Pasanen M, Oja P, Vuori I (1999) Good maintenance of high-impact activity-induced bone gain by voluntary, unsupervised exercises: an 8-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res 14:125–128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heinonen A, Kannus P, Sievänen H, Oja P, Pasanen M, Rinne M, Uusi-Rasi K, Vuori I (1996) Randomised controlled trial of effect of high-impact exercise on selected risk factors for osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 348:1343–1347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sievänen H, Kannus P, Nieminen V, Heinonen A, Oja P, Vuori I (1996) Estimation of various mechanical characteristics of human bones using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: methodology and precision. Bone 18:17S–27SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sievänen H, Oja P, Vuori I (1994) Scanner-induced variability and quality assurance in longitudinal dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements. Med Phys 21:1795–1805PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Diggle PJ, Liang K-Y, Zeger SL (1994) Analysis of longitudinal data. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 55–68, 131–142Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nelson DA, Bouxsein ML (2001) Exercise maintains bone mass, but do people maintain exercise? Editorial. J Bone Miner Res 16:202–205.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Kontulainen
    • 1
    • 2
  • A. Heinonen
    • 1
  • P. Kannus
    • 1
  • M. Pasanen
    • 1
  • H. Sievänen
    • 1
  • I. Vuori
    • 1
  1. 1.UKK Institute for Health Promotion ResearchTampereFinland
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations