Key result
Water-based circuit training exercise improved aerobic capacity (MD 2.5 ml/kg/min; 95% CI 0.6 to 4.4) and body fat to a similar degree as gym-based exercise in stable coronary heart disease.
Why the study?
The effects of water-based circuit training exercise on aerobic capacity, strength, and body composition in people with stable coronary heart disease, and how they compare with gym-based exercise, were unclear.
Does water-based circuit training exercise improve aerobic capacity, strength, and body composition in people with stable coronary heart disease?
RCT (n=52)
concealed allocation
Does water-based circuit training exercise improve aerobic capacity, strength, and body composition in people with stable coronary heart disease?
Mean Difference: 2.5 (95% CI 0.6–4.4)
Water-based circuit training is an effective and well-tolerated alternative to gym-based exercise for improving fitness, leg strength, and body composition in patients with stable coronary heart disease.
Offers water-based circuit training as a viable alternative to gym-based exercise in stable CHD; extends RCT evidence for circuit training modalities.
QUESTION: In people with stable coronary heart disease, what are the effects of water-based circuit training exercise on aerobic capacity, strength and body composition? How do these effects compare with those of gym-based exercise? DESIGN: Parallel group, randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-two participants with stable coronary heart disease. INTERVENTIONS: Twelve weeks of: three 1-hour sessions per week of moderate-intensity water-based circuit training exercise with alternating aerobic and resistance stations (WEX); three 1-hour sessions per week of moderate-intensity gym-based circuit training exercise (GEX); or continuing usual activities (control). OUTCOME MEASURES: ), upper and lower limb one repetition maximum strength (biceps curl, latissimus dorsi pulldown, hamstring curl and leg press), anthropometry (weight, body mass index and girth) and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: compared with control: WEX by 2.5 ml/kg/min (95% CI 0.6 to 4.4) and GEX by 2.3 ml/kg/min (95% CI 0.6 to 4.0). WEX and GEX improved hamstring strength compared with control: WEX by 6.3 kg (95% CI 1.2 to 11.3) and GEX by 7.6 kg (95% CI 2.9 to 12.2). Compared with control, GEX increased leg press strength by 15.5 kg (95% CI 5.7 to 25.3), whereas the effect of WEX was less clear (MD 7.1 kg, 95% CI -3.5 to 17.7). Only GEX improved latissimus dorsi pulldown strength. Compared with control, total body fat was reduced with WEX (-1.1 kg, 95% CI -2.3 to 0.0) and GEX (-1.2 kg, 95% CI -2.3 to -0.1). There were negligible between-group differences in weight or waist circumference. CONCLUSION: WEX was well tolerated and improved aerobic capacity, leg strength and body fat to a similar degree as GEX in people with coronary heart disease. These findings suggest that WEX is an effective exercise training alternative to GEX for people with coronary heart disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR12616000102471.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Scheer et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in stable coronary heart disease (n=52). water-based circuit training exercise (WEX) vs. gym-based circuit training exercise (GEX) or continuing usual activities (control) was evaluated on aerobic capacity (MD 2.5 ml/kg/min, 95% CI 0.6 to 4.4). Water-based circuit training exercise improved aerobic capacity (MD 2.5 ml/kg/min; 95% CI 0.6 to 4.4) and body fat to a similar degree as gym-based exercise in stable coronary heart disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: