Concurrent and Aerobic Exercise on Maximal Oxygen Consumption in Adults with Obesity: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Felipe Madrid Zapata, Jonathan Orozco Osorio, Jerman Jesyd Cruz-González, V. H. Arboleda-Serna
{"title":"Concurrent and Aerobic Exercise on Maximal Oxygen Consumption in Adults with Obesity: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Felipe Madrid Zapata, Jonathan Orozco Osorio, Jerman Jesyd Cruz-González, V. H. Arboleda-Serna","doi":"10.46634/riics.306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Concurrent and aerobic physical exercise are strategies for treating overweight and obesity. Most interventions have utilized cardiovascular or guided execution machines, which often involve high-cost materials not easily accessible to the general population.\nObjective. Identify the effect of 12 weeks of exercise (concurrent vs. aerobic training) based on the polarized training intensity distribution model on maximal oxygen consumption, muscle strength, and body composition.\nMaterials and methods. A randomized controlled trial with two groups, concurrent vs. aerobic training (n = 28), in overweight and obese individuals. Both groups will perform 36 sessions, 3 times a week, on alternate days.\nResults. Current evidence has not demonstrated the superiority of concurrent over aerobic exercise on VO2max, muscle strength, and body composition. Additionally, the few randomized studies with concurrent exercise and the methodological limitations in their designs justify the importance of comparing both types of exercise to determine the best strategies for overweight and obese individuals regarding the mentioned outcomes.","PeriodicalId":508578,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Investigación e Innovación en Ciencias de la Salud","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46634/riics.306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Concurrent and aerobic physical exercise are strategies for treating overweight and obesity. Most interventions have utilized cardiovascular or guided execution machines, which often involve high-cost materials not easily accessible to the general population. Objective. Identify the effect of 12 weeks of exercise (concurrent vs. aerobic training) based on the polarized training intensity distribution model on maximal oxygen consumption, muscle strength, and body composition. Materials and methods. A randomized controlled trial with two groups, concurrent vs. aerobic training (n = 28), in overweight and obese individuals. Both groups will perform 36 sessions, 3 times a week, on alternate days. Results. Current evidence has not demonstrated the superiority of concurrent over aerobic exercise on VO2max, muscle strength, and body composition. Additionally, the few randomized studies with concurrent exercise and the methodological limitations in their designs justify the importance of comparing both types of exercise to determine the best strategies for overweight and obese individuals regarding the mentioned outcomes.
同时进行有氧运动和有氧运动对成人肥胖症患者最大耗氧量的影响:随机对照试验的研究方案
背景。同时进行有氧体育锻炼是治疗超重和肥胖症的策略。大多数干预措施都是利用心血管或引导式执行机器,这些机器往往涉及高成本材料,一般人不易获得。确定基于极化训练强度分布模型的 12 周运动(同步训练与有氧训练)对最大耗氧量、肌肉力量和身体成分的影响。在超重和肥胖者中开展随机对照试验,分为两组,即同期训练与有氧训练(n = 28)。两组均进行 36 次训练,每周 3 次,隔天进行。目前的证据并未证明同期运动在最大氧饱和度、肌肉力量和身体成分方面优于有氧运动。此外,有关同期运动的随机研究很少,而且这些研究的设计方法存在局限性,因此必须对两种类型的运动进行比较,以确定适合超重和肥胖者的有关上述结果的最佳策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信