Jazz dance and concurrent training for menopausal symptom relief: evidence from the MenosPausa mais movimento project

Objective: To analyze the effects of two 16-week physical exercise programs (jazz dance [JD] and concurrent training [CT]) compared with a control group (CG), as well as the impact of detraining (6 mo and 12 mo follow-ups), on menopausal symptoms in postmenopausal women. Methods: This is a randomized clinical trial with follow-up at 6 and 12 months. A total of 70 postmenopausal women (mean age: 53.19 ± 3.39 y) were included. Participants were randomly allocated into 3 groups: jazz dance, concurrent training, and control. The severity of menopausal symptoms was assessed using the Menopause Rating Scale (MRS). A linear mixed-effect model with random effects was used for statistical analysis under 2 approaches: intention-to-treat (ITT) and protocol adherence. A paired t test analysis of score changes was also conducted as a complementary descriptive analysis, between baseline and subsequent time points. Results: Significant time-related changes in somatic, psychological, urogenital, and total symptoms were observed in both the ITT and per-protocol analyses ( P < 0.005), although no significant group×time interactions were identified. All 3 groups (JD, CT, and even the CG) showed improvements in menopausal symptoms over time, with benefits persisting during follow-up. Regarding changes over time, the CT group experienced the greatest reduction in symptoms over time, reducing the total questionnaire score by more than 7 points postintervention, more than 9 points at the 6-month follow-up, and maintaining the benefits even after one year. JD also reduced symptoms, but to a lesser extent compared with CT, by almost 4 points postintervention, and 6 points at the 6-month follow-up, with benefits also persisting after 1 year. Although the CG also showed some improvement, it was less pronounced compared with the intervention groups. Conclusions: Although improvements in menopausal symptoms were observed over time within all groups, including the control group, no significant group×time interactions were found. Therefore, this study did not demonstrate a superior effect of JD or CT compared with the CG, only the results that compare the interventions and CG over time are interpretable.