Key result
Step-aerobic and core exercises for 16 weeks significantly improved left ventricular systolic function (p<0.01), with step-aerobics improving diastolic function more than core exercises.
Why the study?
Does step-aerobic exercise compared to core exercise improve left ventricular function and physiological parameters in sedentary women?
Population
45 sedentary women volunteers (step-aerobic group n=25, core exercise group n=20)
Comparison
Step-aerobic exercises applied 4 days a week for… vs Core exercises applied 4 days a week for 16…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
16 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Supports exercise for LV systolic function in sedentary women; leaves open step-aerobic superiority for diastolic parameters pending RCTs.
Does step-aerobic exercise compared to core exercise improve left ventricular function and physiological parameters in sedentary women?
p-value: p=<0.05
Both step-aerobic and core exercises for 16 weeks improve left ventricular systolic function and cardiovascular risk markers in sedentary women, with step-aerobics providing greater diastolic function benefits.
Çiçek et al. (2017) studied Sedentary lifestyle (n=45). Step-aerobic exercises vs. Core exercises was evaluated on Left ventricular structure and function and physiological parameters (p=<0.05). Step-aerobic and core exercises for 16 weeks significantly improved left ventricular systolic function (p<0.01), with step-aerobics improving diastolic function more than core exercises.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: