The Effect of Aerobic Versus Anaerobic Training on Physiological, Morphological, Hematological, And Biochemical markers in Sedentary Adult Office Workers

<ns3:p> Background: Sedentary behavior among office workers is a major risk factor for cardiometabolic disorders, yet comparative evidence on the most effective training modality for this specific population remains insufficient. This study investigated the comparative effects of 8-week aerobic training (AG) versus anaerobic training (NG) on physiological capacity, morphological variables, hematological profiles, and biochemical markers in sedentary adult office workers. Methods: Using a randomized two-group pre-post design, 42 sedentary office workers (ages 20–39) were randomly assigned to either the aerobic group (AG; n = 21) or the anaerobic group (NG; n = 21). The AG protocol consisted of continuous exercise at 60–75% of maximal heart rate (HRmax), while the NG protocol involved high-intensity intervals at 80–90% HRmax, both performed three days per week for eight weeks. Primary and secondary outcomes, including VO₂max, blood pressure (SBP/ DBP), body fat percentage (%BF), lipid profiles, and hematological markers, were assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Independent sample t-tests (p < 0.05) were used to compare mean change scores (Δ) between groups. Results: Both interventions resulted in numerical improvements from baseline across most variables. However, betweengroup analysis revealed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) in the magnitude of change between the AG and NG for physiological (VO₂max, $p=0.481; SBP, p=0.949), morphological (BMI, p=0.579; %BF, p=0.763), or biochemical (LDL, p=0.693; BG, p=0.616) markers. Notably, a large effect size was observed for the change in hemoglobin (HGB) ηp = 0.116) in favor of the AG, though this did not reach statistical significance (p=0.057). Small to medium effect sizes were found for all other hematological and metabolic parameters, suggesting comparable adaptations between modalities. Conclusion: For sedentary populations, the implementation of any structured exercise program is more critical than the specific choice of training intensity or type. These results indicate that both aerobic and anaerobic training appear to be valid and effective strategies for mitigating the cardiometabolic and hematological risks associated with prolonged sedentary behavior. Consequently, workplace wellness initiatives can offer either modality based on employee preference and time availability, as both provide robust health benefits for this population. </ns3:p>