Key result
Circuit weight-interval training improves VO2max by ~2.4 mL/kg/min in sedentary workers.
Why the study?
Sedentary behaviors involving sitting and low energy expenditure are associated with adverse cardiometabolic effects, but the effects of circuit weight interval training on physical fitness, quality of life, and autonomic adaptations across postures remained to be evaluated in sedentary workers.
Does combined circuit weight interval training (CWIT) improve physical fitness, quality of life, and heart rate variability in adult sedentary workers?
RCT (n=27)
Open-label
Semi-randomized
No
Does combined circuit weight interval training (CWIT) improve physical fitness, quality of life, and heart rate variability in adult sedentary workers?
Absolute Event Rate: 36.45% vs 34.03%
p-value: p=<0.05
A 12-week circuit weight-interval training program improved aerobic capacity, flexibility, quality of life, and heart rate variability in sedentary workers.
May support CWIT for fitness gains in sedentary workers; hypothesis-generating, requiring RCTs before practice change.
Sedentary behaviors, those that involve sitting and low levels of energy expenditure, have been associated with several adverse cardiometabolic effects. This study evaluated the chronic effects of a combined circuit weight interval training (CWIT) on physical fitness, quality of life, and heart rate variability (HRV), and compared the effects of CWIT-induced autonomic adaptations on different postures in adult sedentary workers. Twenty-seven sedentary workers (age 36.9 ± 9.2 years old, 13 men and 14 women) were divided into two groups: control, who continued their sedentary behavior, and experimental, who were submitted to a CWIT for 12 weeks, completing two ~40 min sessions per week. Monitoring of 8th, 16th, and 24th sessions revealed a moderate training load during sessions. Participants exhibited an improved aerobic capacity (VO2max, 34.03 ± 5.36 vs. 36.45 ± 6.05 mL/kg/min, p < 0.05) and flexibility (22.6 ± 11.4 vs. 25.3 ± 10.1 cm, p < 0.05) after the training period. In addition, they showed greater quality of life scores. However, the CWIT did not change body composition. Interestingly, more HRV parameters were improved in the seated position. The CWIT used in the current study was associated with improvements in several fitness and quality of life parameters, as well as in cardiac autonomic control of HR in adult sedentary workers. Examination of different body positions when evaluating changes in HRV appears to be a relevant aspect to be considered in further studies. Future randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with larger samples of both sexes should confirm these promising results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oliveira et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Sedentary workers (n=27). Combined circuit weight-interval training (CWIT) vs. Control (continued sedentary behavior) was evaluated on Aerobic capacity (VO2max) (p=<0.05). A 12-week combined circuit weight-interval training program significantly improved aerobic capacity (VO2max increased from 34.03 to 36.45 mL/kg/min) and flexibility in adult sedentary workers.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: