Comparison Between the Effects of Continuous and Intermittent Aerobic Exercise on Weight Loss and Body Fat Percentage in Overweight and Obese Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
International journal of preventive medicine 08/2013; 4(8):881-8.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Prevalence of obesity and overweightness in different societies is increasing. Role of physical activity in weight loss and also prevention from some chronic diseases has been discussed previously. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of two different aerobic exercises (intermittent and continuous exercises) while prescribed with concurrent calorie-restrict diet on the weight loss and body fat of overweight and obese females.
Fifteen individuals in intermittent group performed 40 min moderate Intensity exercise in 3 bouts per day for 5 days per week; the 15 participants of continuous group exercised a single 40 min bout per day, 5 days per week. Also, 15 participants were included in control group without exercise program. A self-monitoring calorie-restrict diet was recommended to all participants. The body fat percentage, waist circumference, and also skin fold thickness of all participants were assessed at baseline and 12(th) weeks.
The reduction of weight and BMI of participants in intermittent group (-3.33 ± 1.80 and -1.34 ± 0.70, respectively) was significantly more than comparable changes in continuous group (-1.23 ± 1.60 and 0.49 ± 0.65, respectively) (P = 0.048 and 0.041, respectively). After the intervention, there was no significant difference between case and controls in terms of body fat percentage, waist circumference, and sum of skin fold thickness.
It seems that moderate intensity intermittent exercise for more than 150 min/ week is more efficient than continuous exercise in weight loss of obese and overweight women.

78 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity during childhood is a matter of growing concern. Several reports show increasing rates of obesity in developed countries, whereas the extent of the problem in developing countries remains unknown. The aim of this study was to fill this gap by quantifying the prevalence and trends of overweight among preschool children in developing countries. One hundred sixty nationally representative cross-sectional surveys from 94 countries were analyzed in a standardized way to allow comparisons across countries and over time. Overweight was defined as a weight-for-height >2 SDs from the National Center for Health Statistics/World Health Organization international reference median. Prevalences of wasted children (< -2 SDs) are also presented to enable comparisons between both ends of the distribution. The global prevalence of overweight was 3.3%. Some countries and regions, however, had considerably higher rates, and overweight was shown to increase in 16 of 38 countries with trend data. Countries with the highest prevalences of overweight are located mainly in the Middle East, North Africa, and Latin America. Rates of wasting were generally higher than those of overweight; Africa and Asia had wasting rates 2.5-3.5 times higher than overweight rates. Countries with high wasting rates tended to have low overweight rates and vice versa. These estimates show that attention should be paid to monitoring levels and trends of overweight in children. This, however, should not be done at the expense of decreasing international commitments to alleviating undernutrition. The data presented confirm that undernutrition remains a major public health problem worldwide.
    American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 10/2000; 72(4):1032-9. · 6.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ACSM Position Stand on the Appropriate Intervention Strategies for Weight Loss and Prevention of Weight Regain for Adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 33, No. 12, 2001, pp. 2145–2156. In excess of 55% of adults in the United States are classified as either overweight (body mass index = 25–29.9 kg·m−2) or obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg·m−2). To address this significant public health problem, the American College of Sports Medicine recommends that the combination of reductions in energy intake and increases in energy expenditure, through structured exercise and other forms of physical activity, be a component of weight loss intervention programs. An energy deficit of 500–1000 kcal·d−1 achieved through reductions in total energy intake is recommended. Moreover, it appears that reducing dietary fat intake to <30% of total energy intake may facilitate weight loss by reducing total energy intake. Although there may be advantages to modifying protein and carbohydrate intake, the optimal doses of these macronutritents for weight loss have not been determined. Significant health benefits can be recognized with participation in a minimum of 150 min (2.5 h) of moderate intensity exercise per week, and overweight and obese adults should progressively increase to this initial exercise goal. However, there may be advantages to progressively increasing exercise to 200–300 min (3.3–5 h) of exercise per week, as recent scientific evidence indicates that this level of exercise facilitates the long-term maintenance of weight loss. The addition of resistance exercise to a weight loss intervention will increase strength and function but may not attenuate the loss of fat-free mass typically observed with reductions in total energy intake and loss of body weight. When medically indicated, pharmacotherapy may be used for weight loss, but pharmacotherapy appears to be most effective when used in combination with modifications of both eating and exercise behaviors. The American College of Sports Medicine recommends that the strategies outlined in this position paper be incorporated into interventions targeting weight loss and the prevention of weight regain for adults.
    Medicine &amp Science in Sports &amp Exercise 12/2001; 33(12):2145-2156. DOI:10.1097/00005768-200112000-00026 · 3.98 Impact Factor
Show more