Benefits of exercise are known for a long time, but mechanisms underlying the exercise mode recommendations for specific chronic cardiovascular diseases remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different circuit training protocols in order to determine which is the best for weight loss and for specific overweight- related disorders. Forty-five female sedentary overweight participants from 20 to 50 years (average 31.8±11.2) were enrolled and assigned to three different groups; each group was compared with a control normal-weight group. Three different circuit protocols were randomly assigned to each overweight group: aerobictone- aerobic (ATA), aerobic-circuit-aerobic (ACA) and mini-trampoline circuit (MTC), while control group performed a classic circuit weight training (CWT). Every group trained three times per week, for 12 weeks. The results show that ATA group reduced body fat and total body mass more than other groups (P<0.001; P=0.007). ACA group reduced total body mass in significant statistical way (P=0.032), as well as body fat (P<0.001) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.013). In MTC group there was a significant reduction in every parameter we analyzed (total body mass, body fat and lipid profile: P<0.001). CWT group has shown a significant loss only in body fat (P<0.001). Every circuit protocol is optimal for reducing body fat and total body mass: however, MTC protocol has shown the best results on lipid profile.

Contrò, V., Bianco, A., Cooper, J., Sacco, A., Macchiarella, A., Traina, M., et al. (2017). Effects of different circuit training protocols on body mass, fat mass and blood parameters in overweight adults. JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH.

Effects of different circuit training protocols on body mass, fat mass and blood parameters in overweight adults

Contro', Valentina;BIANCO, Antonino;TRAINA, Marcello;PROIA, Patrizia
2017-01-01

Abstract

Benefits of exercise are known for a long time, but mechanisms underlying the exercise mode recommendations for specific chronic cardiovascular diseases remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different circuit training protocols in order to determine which is the best for weight loss and for specific overweight- related disorders. Forty-five female sedentary overweight participants from 20 to 50 years (average 31.8±11.2) were enrolled and assigned to three different groups; each group was compared with a control normal-weight group. Three different circuit protocols were randomly assigned to each overweight group: aerobictone- aerobic (ATA), aerobic-circuit-aerobic (ACA) and mini-trampoline circuit (MTC), while control group performed a classic circuit weight training (CWT). Every group trained three times per week, for 12 weeks. The results show that ATA group reduced body fat and total body mass more than other groups (P<0.001; P=0.007). ACA group reduced total body mass in significant statistical way (P=0.032), as well as body fat (P<0.001) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.013). In MTC group there was a significant reduction in every parameter we analyzed (total body mass, body fat and lipid profile: P<0.001). CWT group has shown a significant loss only in body fat (P<0.001). Every circuit protocol is optimal for reducing body fat and total body mass: however, MTC protocol has shown the best results on lipid profile.
2017
Contrò, V., Bianco, A., Cooper, J., Sacco, A., Macchiarella, A., Traina, M., et al. (2017). Effects of different circuit training protocols on body mass, fat mass and blood parameters in overweight adults. JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Contrò 2017.pdf

accesso aperto

Dimensione 123.43 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
123.43 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10447/232821
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 11
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact