The Effects of Standardised versus Individualised Aerobic Exercise Prescription on Fitness-Fatness Index in Sedentary Adults: A Randomised Controlled Trial
A poor Fitness Fatness Index (FFI) is associated with type 2 diabetes incidence, other chronic conditions (Alzheimer's, cancer, and cardiovascular disease) and all-cause mortality. Recent investigations have proposed that an individualised exercise prescription based on ventilatory thresholds i...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of sports science & medicine 2022-09, Vol.21 (3), p.347-355 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | A poor Fitness Fatness Index (FFI) is associated with type 2 diabetes incidence, other chronic conditions (Alzheimer's, cancer, and cardiovascular disease) and all-cause mortality. Recent investigations have proposed that an individualised exercise prescription based on ventilatory thresholds is more effective than a standardised prescription in improving cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), a key mediator of FFI. Thus, the aim of the current study was to determine the effectiveness of individualised versus standardised exercise prescription on FFI in sedentary adults. Thirty-eight sedentary individuals were randomised to 12-weeks of: (1) individualised exercise training using ventilatory thresholds (n = 19) or (2) standardised exercise training using a percentage of heart rate reserve (n = 19). A convenience sample was also recruited as a control group (n=8). Participants completed CRF exercise training three days per week, for 12-weeks on a motorised treadmill. FFI was calculated as CRF in metabolic equivalents (METs), divided by fatness determined by waist to height ratio (WtHR). A graded exercise test was used to measure CRF, and anthropometric measures (height and waist circumference) were assessed to ascertain WtHR. There was a difference in FFI change between study groups, whilst controlling for baseline FFI, F (2, 42) = 19.382 p < .001, partial η2 = 0.480. The magnitude of FFI increase from baseline was significantly higher in the individualised (+15%) compared to the standardised (+10%) (
= 0.028) and control group (+4%) (
= |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1303-2968 1303-2968 |
DOI: | 10.52082/jssm.2022.347 |