| Literature DB >> 29888250 |
T K Møller1, T-T Nielsen2,3, R Andersen4, I Lundager1, H F Hansen2, L Ottesen2, P Krustrup1,5, M B Randers1.
Abstract
This study compares the effects of team-sport training, for sedentary men with lifestyle diseases, with fitness training in a pragmatic set-up in a community health centre (CHC). Thirty-two men in the fitness group (FiG) and 36 men in the team-sport group (TsG) completed the training and trained for 60-90 min, two times/week for 12-16 weeks. In FiG and TsG, mean heart rate (HR) during training was 73.2% and 74.5% of HRmax, respectively. Percentage of training time above 90%HRmax was 6 ± 9% and 10 ± 15% and the percentage of participants who spent > 10% of total training time with HR > 90%HRmax was 20% and 41%, in FiG and TsG, respectively. In FiG, total fat mass was reduced by 3.5% (P < 0.01), while performance in the 6 min walking test (6MWT) increased by 11% (P < 0.001). In TsG, total fat mass was reduced by 2.2% (P < 0.01), while 6MWT performance improved by 5% (P < 0.05). Between-group differences were observed for systolic BP (P = 0.041) and mean arterial pressure (P = 0.050) in favour of TsG and for sit-to-stand test (P = 0.031) in favour of FiG. In conclusion, small-sided team sport is a worthy alternative to fitness training since the overall health effects are comparable, for example, improved balance and reduced fat mass. Team sport elicits high heart rates and improves cardiovascular health by reducing blood pressure, while fitness training improves sit-to-stand test performance related to activity of daily living.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29888250 PMCID: PMC5977017 DOI: 10.1155/2018/1571807
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Recruitment process for all participants in year 1: fitness and year 2: team sport.
Participants characteristics, per protocol.
|
| FiG | TsG | Between-group differences | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 32/36 | 61 (11) | 58 (14) | 0.485 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 27/33 | 133 (13) | 129 (15) | 0.345 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 27/33 | 79 (8) | 78 (8) | 0.529 |
| MAP (mmHg) | 27/33 | 97 (9) | 95 (10) | 0.394 |
| RHR (b.p.m.) | 27/33 | 69 (8) | 69 (11) | 0.833 |
| Weight (kg) | 32/36 | 105.4 (28.4) | 99.7 (25.0) | 0.342 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 32/36 | 33.9 (7.4) | 32.3 (6.1) | 0.360 |
| LBM (kg) | 32/36 | 61.7 (12.4) | 58.5 (10.0) | 0.239 |
| Fat mass (kg) | 32/36 | 39.1 (16.2) | 36.8 (14.5) | 0.526 |
| Fat percentage (%) | 32/36 | 36.0 (7.3) | 35.7 (7.3) | 0.847 |
| Aerobic fitness (mlO2/min/kg) | 22/29 | 22.4 (5.9) | 21.7 (5.4) | 0.659 |
|
| 46/65 | |||
| Hypertension | 11/13 | 23.9 | 20.0 | 0.980 |
| Diabetes | 9/15 | 19.6 | 23.1 | 0.294 |
| BMI > 35 | 8/8 | 17.4 | 12.3 | 0.718 |
| Dyslipidemia | 6/12 | 13.0 | 18.5 | 0.207 |
| Others | 12/17 | 26.1 | 26.2 | 0.882 |
Baseline characteristics. Data are presented as means (SD). SBP: systolic blood pressure. DBP: diastolic blood pressure. MAP: mean arterial pressure. RHR: resting heart rate. LBM: lean body mass. High total referral count, because of multiple referrals for some participants.
Figure 2Training intensity - percentage of HRmax. FiG: white; N = 10, TsG: grey; N = 22. Data are presented as median and 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentile.
Figure 3Changes in SBP, DBP, and MAP. FiG: white, TsG: grey. SBP: systolic blood pressure. DBP: diastolic blood pressure. MAP: mean arterial pressure. Data are presented as change scores ± SE. ∗ between-group effect in favour of TsG, P < 0.05.
Effects of 12 weeks of traditional fitness training and team sport training.
|
| FiG | TsG | TsG estimated mean difference from FiG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg) | 32/36 | −1.9 (−3.2, −0.5) | −1.3 (−2.4, −0.2) | 0.5 (−1.2, 2.2) |
| Fat mass (kg) | 32/36 | −1.6 (−2.7, −0.4) | −0.9 (−1.5, −0.2) | 0.6 (−0.6, 1.9) |
| LBM (kg) | 32/36 | −0.4 (−1.1, 0.2) | −0.2 (−0.8, 0.4) | 0.2 (−0.7, 1.0) |
| Aerobic fitness (mlO2/kg/min) | 22/29 | 1.1 (−0.0, 2.2) | 0.5 (−0.5, 1.5) | −0.6 (−2.1, 0.8) |
| STS (stand/30 s) | 19/15 | 3.5 (2.6, 4.5) | 1.5 (−0.3, 3.3) | −2.1 (−3.9, −0.2) |
| Balance (s) | 12/11 | 4.5 (0.0, 9.5) | 3.6 (0.6, 6.5) | 0.2 (−4.3, 4.7) |
| 6MWT (m) | 27/17 | 54.4 (33.3, 75.6) | 27.2 (2.4, 52.0) | −28.0 (−57.7, 1.6) |
| Attendance (%) | 29/34 | 67.4 (56.7, 78.2) | 59.1 (50.7, 67.4) | −8.4 (−21.5, 4.8) |
Within-group effects (P ≤ 0.05). Between-group effects (P ≤ 0.05). Within-group data presented as change scores (95% CI), attendance as mean (95% CI), and between-group data as estimated mean difference (95% CI) with FiG as reference group. LBM: lean body mass. STS: sit-to-stand. 6MWT: 6-minute walking test.