| Literature DB >> 32807119 |
Fabricio de Souza1, Felipe Nunes Lanzendorf2, Márcia Mendonça Marcos de Souza3, Fabiana Schuelter-Trevisol4,5, Daisson José Trevisol4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity is considered a top public health concern, and its prevalence is growing every day. Thus, interventions to address this problem should be encouraged and further studied. In this regard, the aim of this review was to summarize the evidence of martial arts interventions to evaluate their effectiveness on the anthropometric and body composition parameters of overweight and obese subjects.Entities:
Keywords: Body mass index; Exercise; Physical activity; Weight loss
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32807119 PMCID: PMC7433112 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09340-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1PRISMA – Study selection process. Body mass index. Body-fat percentage. Waist circumference
Characteristics of the intervention studies that included martial arts
| Study | Quality | Country/ Setting | Body composition | BMI | Sample n (total/F); Mean age, years (SD or range); ethnicity | Intervention | Control | Main results | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tsang et al. [ | 21 medium | Australia/Hospital | BMI/DEXA | ≥85% | 20/12; 13.1 (2.1); NR | Kung Fu 3 x week - 1 h | Tai Chi 3 x week - 1 h | Difference between groups: waist circumference, with a lower circumference in the CG. | 24 |
| Beebe et al. [ | 11 low | USA/University | BMI | ≥30–49.9 kg/m2 | 26/26; 61.5 (6.0); NR | Tai Chi 3 x week 45 min + NE 1 x week 45 min | NE 1 x week 45 min | Difference within groups: both groups showed a significant decrease in body-weight, and waist circumference. The CG had a significant decrease in the BMI and hip circumference. | 16 |
| Chen et al. [ | 18 medium | China/Hospital | BMI | ≥30–35 kg/m2 | 117/54; 58.2 (6.0); Asian | Tai Chi 3 x week - 1 h | Conventional exercises 3 x week - 1 h | Difference between groups: BMI, with a decrease in the IG. Difference within groups: the IG showed a significant decrease in the BMI. | 12 |
| Chyu et al. [ | 20 medium | USA/Community | BMI/bioimpedance | ≥25 kg/m2 | 47/47; 40.6 (6.2); NR | MAE 3 x week - 1 h | Daily activities | Difference between groups: FFM and MM, with a lower amount in the IG. | 12 |
| Dechamps et al. [ | 21 medium | France/Hospital | BMI/BOD POD | ≥30 kg/m2 | 21/21; 44.4 (11.9); NR | Tai Chi 1 x week - 2 h + diet + NI + PI + MI | Conventional exercises 1 x week - 2 h + diet + NI + PI + MI | Difference between groups: The IG showed a decrease in fat (kg) and percent body fat. | 10 |
| Katkowski et al. [ | 15 low | USA/Laboratory | BMI/DEXA | ≥30–49.9 kg/m2 | 27/27; 61.5 (5.9); NR | Tai Chi 3 x week 45 min + NI 1 x week 45 min + diet | NI 1 x week 45 min + diet | Difference within groups: weight, BMI, fat (kg), percent body fat, and waist circumference, with a decrease in both groups. | 16 |
DEXA Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, BM behavior modification, BMI body mass index, ER energy restriction, F female, PE physical education, NE nutritional education, NI nutritional intervention, PI psychological intervention, MI medical intervention, NR not reported, RT resistance training, SD standard deviation, CI confidence interval, ST strength training, D Duration in weeks, MAE martial arts exercises, BOD POD air displacement, IG intervention group, CG control group, FFM fat-free mass, MM muscle mass
Study quality assessment using the Downs & Black tool
| Studies Item | Tsang et al. [ | Beebe et al. [ | Chen et al. [ | Chyu et al. [ | Dechamps et al. [ | Katkowski et al. [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D&B: 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| D&B: 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| D&B: 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| D&B: 13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| D&B: 14 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 15 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 16 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 17 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 18 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| D&B: 20 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 21 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 22 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 23 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D&B: 24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 26 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| D&B: 27 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
D&B Downs & Black item;
Anthropometric and body composition parameters of the intervention groups that took martial arts. Values expressed as mean (±SD)
| Reference | Baseline | Follow-up | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | BW | BMI | WC | HC | WHR | FM (%) | FM (kg) | N | BW | BMI | WC | HC | WHR | FM (%) | FM (kg) | |
| Tsang et al. [ | 12 | 84.9 | 32.1 (6.7) | 99.1 (17.9) | NR | NR | 44.6 (6.6) | 37.5 (15.0) | 11 | 87.2 | 32.7 (7.8) | 100.2 (19.3) | NR | NR | 43.1 (7.6) | 37.4 (15.7) |
| Beebe et al. [ | 16 | 88.6 (13.95) | 33.7 (4.8) | 105.6 (9.1) | 121.04 (11.9) | NR | NR | NR | 13 | 86.3 (14.5)a | 32.8 (5.0) | 102.0 (10.4)a | 118.7 (11.6) | NR | NR | NR |
| Chen et al. [ | 56 | NR | 33.5 (4.8) | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 50 | NR | 31.3 (4.2)a | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Chyu et al. [ | 23 | 96.1 (15.2) | 36.14 (5.42) | NR | NR | NR | NR | 45.06 (10.68) | 16 | 96.1 (17.1) | 35.74 (5.97) | NR | NR | NR | NR | 44.05 (11.69) |
| Dechamps et al. [ | 11 | 95.9 (14.7) | 37.4 (4.8) | NR | NR | NR | 48.5 (4.3) | 46.6 (9) | 11 | 92.5 (15.9) | 36.0 (5.6) | NR | NR | NR | 45.6 (5.1)a | 42.6 (9.5)a |
| Katkowski et al. [ | 14 | 90.0 (3.9) | 34.3 (5.1) | 106.8 (2.6) | NR | NR | 34.9 (1.2) | 43.0 (2.5) | 14 | 87.7 (4.0)a | NRa | 103.6 (3.0)a | NR | NR | 30.9 (1.4)a | 41.0 (2.6)a |
a p < 0.05; N participants, BW body weight, BMI body mass index, WC waist circumference, HC hip circumference, WHR waist-to-hip ratio, FM fat mass, NR not reported, SD standard deviation
Comparison of anthropometric and body composition parameters between treatment and control groups. Values expressed as mean (SD)
| Study | Group | BMI | Waist circumference | % fat mass | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | ||
| Tsang et al. [ | Treatment | 32.1 (6.7) | 32.7 (7.8) | 99.1 (17.9) | 100.2 (19.3) | 44.6 (6.6) | 43.1 (7.6) |
| Control | 34.0 (7.0) | 34.2 (7.2) | 106.5 (16.7) | 103.6 (17.1) a | 47.7 (5.3) | 47.4 (5.6) | |
| Beebe et al. [ | Treatment | 33.7 (4.8) | 32.8 (5.0) | 105.6 (9.1) | 102.0 (10.4) b | NR | NR |
| Control | 34.8 (2.9) | 33.4 (3.1) b | 107.1 (9.0) | 101.9 (10.6) b | NR | NR | |
| Chen et al. [ | Treatment | 33.5 (4.8) | 31.3 (4.2) a, b | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Control | 33.2 (4.1) | 32.8 (4.4) | NR | NR | NR | NR | |
| Chyu et al. [ | Treatment | 36.1 (5.4) | 35.7 (5.9) | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Control | 35.6 (7.1) | 36.2 (7.7) | NR | NR | NR | NR | |
| Dechamps et al. [ | Treatment | 37.4 (4.8) | 36.0 (5.6) b | NR | NR | 48.5 (4.3) | 45.6 (5.1) b |
| Control | 38.5 (7.3) | 39.3 (8.2) | NR | NR | 50.3 (7.0) | 48.1 (4.7) | |
| Katkowski et al. [ | Treatment | 34.3 (5.1) | NRb | 106.8 (2.6) | 103.6 (3.0) b | 34.9 (1.2) | 30.9 (1.4) b |
| Control | 34.8 (2.9) | NR | 107.1(2.5) | 102.0 (2.9) b | 33.5 (1.8) | 28.1 (1.1) a, b | |
aSignificant difference between treatment and control groups; bSignificant difference between pre and post intervention; p < 0.05; BMI body mass index, NR not reported, SD standard deviation
Fig. 2Forest plot and effect sizes for martial arts compared with controls for body mass index, body-fat percentage and Waist circumference