Key result
Combined aerobic and resistance training reduces SBP and DBP vs no exercise in older hypertensive adults.
Why the study?
While aerobic and resistance training effectively lower blood pressure in hypertension, evidence regarding the impact of combined training in older adults remains limited.
Does combined aerobic and resistance training reduce blood pressure more effectively than standalone training in older adults with hypertension?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,253)
Does combined aerobic and resistance training reduce blood pressure more effectively than standalone training in older adults with hypertension?
Combined aerobic and resistance training appears to lower blood pressure more effectively than either modality alone in older adults with hypertension, though high heterogeneity limits confidence in the pooled estimates.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports combined training as first-line nonpharmacologic therapy for hypertension; confirms prior randomized evidence.
Aerobic (AT) and resistance training (RT) are well established as effective strategies for lowering blood pressure (BP) in patients with hypertension; however, evidence on the impact of combined training (CT; AT and RT) on BP remains limited. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of AT, RT, and CT for reducing BP in older adults with pre-existing or established hypertension. Five electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and CINAHL) were systematically searched to identify RCTs reporting the effects of AT, RT, and CT on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). RCTs published in English, involving hypertensive older adults and available in peer-reviewed journals as of December 2024, were included. A random-effects model was used for the analysis, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Nineteen trials were included, totaling 1,253 participants. SBP was reduced following CT (-4.12 (-6.41 to -1.83; p = 0.0004; I² = 94%), AT (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -1.93 (-5.27 to 1.40); p = 0.06; I² = 96%), and RT (SMD = -2.39 (-2.85 to -1.92); p < 0.00001; I² = 27%). DBP was also reduced following CT (SMD = -4.53 (-6.67 to -2.39); p < 0.0001; I² = 95%), AT (SMD = -0.50 (-3.62 to 2.63); p = 0.04; I² = 8%), and RT (SMD = -0.48 (-1.56 to 0.61); p = 0.05; I² = 39%). Compared with AT and RT as standalone interventions, CT showed a greater BP-reducing effect (SMD = -0.98 (-4.76 to 2.81); p = 0.001; I² = 18%); however, this difference was not statistically robust, likely due to the small number of available trials. Although CT lowered BP in older adults with hypertension, very high between-study heterogeneity (I² > 90% in several analyses) limits confidence in these pooled estimates. The effects of AT on BP outcomes were not significantly different from those of RT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alyafei et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Hypertension (n=1,253). Combined training (aerobic and resistance) vs. No exercise was evaluated on Systolic blood pressure (SMD -4.12, 95% CI -6.41 to -1.83, p=0.0004). Combined aerobic and resistance training reduced systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure compared to no exercise in older adults with hypertension.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: