Content uploaded by Nathalie Boisseau
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nathalie Boisseau on Jan 13, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
MICT or HIIT ± RT Programs for Altering Body
Composition in Postmenopausal Women
MARINEAQ1 DUPUIT
1
,MÉLANIE RANCE
2
,CLAIRE MOREL
2
,PATRICE BOUILLON
3
,BRUNO PEREIRA
4
,
ALBAN BONNET
1
,FLORIE MAILLARD
1
,MARTINE DUCLOS
5,6,7,8
,andNATHALIE BOISSEAU
1,6
1
Laboratory of Metabolic Adaptations during Exercise in Pathologic and Physiologic Conditions (AME2P), Université Clermont
Auvergne, EA 3533, Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE;
2
Center of Resources, Expertise and Performance in Sports (CREPS),
Bellerive-sur-Allier, FRANCE;
3
Department of Cardiology, Vichy Hospital, Vichy, FRANCE;
4
Clermont-Ferrand University
Hospital, Biostatistics Unit (DRCI), Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE;
5
Department of Sport Medicine and Functional Explorations,
Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, G. Montpied Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE;
6
CRNH–Auvergne–Rhône-Alpes
(CNRH-AURA), Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE;
7
UFR Medicine, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE;
and
8
INRA, Human Nutrition Unit UMR1019, Clermont-Ferrand, FRANCE
ABSTRACT
DUPUIT, M., M. RANCE, C. MOREL, P. BOUILLON, B. PEREIRA, A. BONNET, F. MAILLARD, M. DUCLOS, and N. BOISSEAU.
MICT or HIIT ± RT Programs for Altering Body Composition in Postmenopausal Women. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 52, No. 3,
pp. 00–00, 2020. Purpose: This study aimed to compare body composition changes induced by moderate-intensity continuous training
(MICT), high-intensity interval training (HIIT), or HIIT + resistance training (RT) programs (3 d·wk
−1
, 12 wk) in postmenopausal women
who are overweight/obese, and to determine whether fat mass reduction is related to greater fat oxidation (FatOx). Methods: Participants
(n= 27) were randomized in three groups: MICT (40 min at 55%–60% of peak power output), HIIT (60 8 s at 80%–90% of peak HR,
12 s active recovery), and HIIT + RT (HIIT +8 whole-body exercises: 1 set of 8–12 repetitions). Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was used
to measure whole-body and abdominal/visceral fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass. FatOx was determined at rest, during a moderate-intensity
exercise (40 min at 50% of peak power output), and for 20 min postexercise, before and after training. Results: Overall, energy intake and
physical activity levels did not vary from the beginning to the end of the intervention. Body weight and total FM decreased in all groups over
time, but significant abdominal/visceral FM losses were observed only in HIIT and HIIT + RT groups. When expressed in percentage, total
FM, fat-free mass, and muscle mass were significantly modified only by HIIT + RT training. FatOx did not change at rest but increased
similarly in the three groups during and after exercise. Therefore, the HIIT-induced greater FM loss was not related to higher FatOx during
or after exercise. Conclusions: MICT or HIIT ± RT could be proposed to nondieting postmenopausal women who are overweight/obese to
decrease weight and whole-body FM. The HIIT programs were more effective than MICT in reducing abdominal/visceral FM. RT addition
did not potentiate this effect but increased the percentage of muscle mass. Key Words: MENOPAUSE, (INTRA)-ABDOMINAL FAT
MASS, HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING, RESISTANCE TRAINING, FAT OXIDATION RATE
In women, the incidence of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and
cardiovascular diseases (CVD) significantly increases af-
ter menopause and is related to an increase of fat mass
(FM) (1–3), loss of fat-free mass (FFM) (especially muscle
mass) (3), and body fat distribution alterations (1,4). The
increase of subcutaneous and particularly intra-abdominal
FM (i.e., visceral FM) after menopause partly explains the
higher CVD risk in postmenopausal women (5).
Menopause is associated with a decrease of the resting met-
abolic rate (RMR) (6) and fat oxidation (FatOx) during phys-
ical activity (7,8) and a lower total energy expenditure (EE)
(8,9). Although literature data show that the diet and physical
activity combination promotes longer-term weight and/or FM
loss, exercise alone also might have positive effects, particu-
larly on subcutaneous and intra-abdominal FM (10), if the
training program is well supervised and if the EE leads to a
negative energy balance (11).
The American College of Sports Medicine has recommended
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in obese patients
for losing weight and/or FM (11). This strategy is efficient in
pre- and postmenopausal women who are overweight or obese
(12,13). Currently, high-intensity interval training (HIIT), which
includes repeated bouts of high-intensity effort followed by
varied recovery times (14), is considered a time-efficient and
safe strategy to reduce total FM and particularly subcutaneous
and intra-abdominal FM in people who are overweight or
Address for correspondence: Nathalie Boisseau, Ph.D., Laboratoire des
Adaptations Métaboliques à l’Exercice en conditions Physiologiques et
Pathologiques (AME2P), 3 rue de la Chebarde, 63171, Aubière Cedex,
France; E-mail: nathalie.boisseau@uca.fr.
Submitted for publication June 2019.
Accepted for publication September 2019.
Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations
appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions
of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.acsm-msse.org).
0195-9131/20/5203-0000/0
MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE
®
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002162
1
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyedited by: Mary Grace Trillana
obese (15). Our group demonstrated that in postmenopausal
nondieting women with type 2 diabetes, HIIT is more effective
for reducing central obesity than MICT and can be proposed as
an alternative exercise program in this population (16). Resis-
tance training (RT) does not enhance weight loss but may
increase FFM and decrease FM, and it is associated with
health risk reduction (11). Although several previous publica-
tions have focused on RT or MICT + RT effects on body com-
position (17,18), only few randomized trials compared the
effect of a combined HIIT + RT program in overweight/obese
adults (19,20), and no study has been performed on postmen-
opausal women. The effects of HIIT ± RT programs on FM
losses may be partly due to the increase of RMR, total EE,
and FatOx (21). No study has thoroughly evaluated the effect
of HIIT or HIIT + RT on these parameters in postmenopausal
women, but limited posttraining muscle mass gain in the female
population could alter these adaptations (22).
Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the effects
of 12-wk MICT, HIIT, and HIIT + RT programs on body
composition and FatOx in postmenopausal women who were
overweight or obese (see Figure, Supplemental Digital Con-
tent, 12-wk MICT, HIIT, and HIIT + RT programs on body
composition and FatOx in postmenopausal women with
overweight/obesity, http://links.lww.com/MSS/B764). We
hypothesized that compared with the traditional MICT, HIIT
programs could be more efficient in reducing whole-body
and abdominal/visceral FM and to favor FatOx, and that
HIIT + RT, by also improving FFM and RMR, could offer
the best benefits.
METHODS
The study was approved by the relevant ethics committee
(Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Est VI, CPPAU1303)
and was registered on ClinicalTrails.gov via the Protocol Reg-
istration System (ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT 03357016). After
receiving detailed information on the study objectives and
protocol, all participants signed a written informed consent.
Participants
Thirty-five women (mean age, 62.4 ± 6.7 yr) were recruited
according to the following inclusion criteria: postmenopausal
women, body mass index (BMI) >25 and ≤40 kg·m
−2
, and
stable eating habits and physical activity for at least 3 months.
Noninclusion criteria were as follows: medical contraindica-
tions to intense physical activity, painful joints, and taking hor-
mone replacement therapy. Finally, 30 postmenopausal women
who were overweight or obese were selected for the three
12-wk interventional programs ( F1Fig. 1). None of the participants
had history of chronic arterial or respiratory disease, CVD, or en-
docrine disorders. All participants reported low levels of physical
activity, based on the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire
(GPAQ) results (23). Upon recruitment, participants were
randomly assigned to an exercise modality (HIIT [n= 10],
MICT [n= 10], HIIT + RT [n= 10]). A familiarization period
of at least 10 d allowed participants to get accustomed to the
exercise equipment before training.
Experimental design
Anthropometric and body composition measure-
ments. Body weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg on
a Seca 709 scale (Balance Seca 709, France) in fasting condi-
tions, with the subjects wearing only underwear. Height was
measured to the nearest 0.5 cm with a wall-mounted stadiometer.
BMI was calculated as body weight (kg) divided by the square
of height (m
2
). Waist circumference (cm) was measured midway
between the last rib and the upper iliac crest, and hip circumfer-
ence was measured at the level of the femoral trochanters. Both
measures were taken in standing position with a measuring tape.
Sagittal abdominal diameter (supine abdominal height) was
measured with a Holtain–Kahn abdominal caliper (Holtain
Limited, Crymych, Pembs, UK) to the nearest millimeters in
the sagittal plane at the level of the iliac crests (L4–L5) during
normal expiration, with the subject lying supine on a firm bench
with knees bent. Abdominal skinfold thickness was measured
at four different sites (at 15 and 7 cm to the right and left of
the navel) with a Harpenden Skinfold Caliper (Mediflex Corp.,
FIGURE 1—Flowchart of participants’recruitmentAQ2 .
http://www.acsm-msse.org2Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Long Island, NY), and the mean subcutaneous abdominal
skinfold thickness was then calculated (16). The same experi-
enced investigator took all anthropometric measurements at
baseline and after 12 wk of training.
Adipose and FFM tissue localization. Total body and
regional FM as well as FFM (expressed as kg and percent of
body mass) were measured with a dual-energy x-ray absorptiom-
etry (DXA) scanner (QDR-4500A; Hologic, Inc., Marlborough,
MA). Two regions of interest were manually isolated and
analyzed by an experienced technician: the area from L1
to L2 to the pubic rami to determine the total abdominal FM
(kg) and the area from the iliac crest to the feet to calculate
the lower-body FM (kg). The same operator performed all
analyses. Total visceral FM (kg) was estimated from the total
abdominal FM on DXA, mean subcutaneous abdominal skinfold
thickness, and abdominal height, as previously described (16).
Preliminary visit—maximal exercise testing. V
˙O
2max
was measured during a graded exhaustive exercise test on a
cycle ergometer (Ergoline, Bitz, Germany). After a 3-min
warm-up at 30 W, power output was increased by 10 W·min
−1
until the participant’s exhaustion (the test lasted between 10
and 15 min after warm-up). Participants werestrongly encour-
aged by the experimenters throughout the test to perform a
maximal effort. Respiratory gases (V
˙O
2
and V
˙CO
2
)were
measured breath by breath through a mask connected to O
2
and CO
2
analyzers (Oxycon pro-Delta; Jaeger, Hoechberg,
Germany). V
˙O
2max
was determined as the highest oxygen
uptake during a 15-s period. Ventilatory parameters were
averaged every 30 s. Heart activity was monitored by ECG
throughout the test, and HR was recorded continuously. The
achievements of V
˙O
2max
criteria were as follows: 1) oxygen
uptake reaching a plateau with increasing work rate, 2) RER
values higher than 1.1, and 3) peak HR (PHR) within 10% of
the age-predicted maximal values (24). The peak power output
(PPO), expressed in watts or Wkg
−1
, was considered the
highest power measured at V
˙O
2max
.
Training Programs
We made the choice to have similar EE between MICT and
HIIT sessions and to have the same session duration between
MICT and HIIT + RT because lackof time is a barrier to exer-
cise for people who are overweight or obese. Thus, before the
beginning of the training programs, the EE induced by an HIIT
session (20 min duration) was measured in four subjects
using a Metamax 3B apparatus (Matsport, France), and the
time needed to spend the same energy was calculated during
the MICT session. The mean EE spent for each HIIT or MICT
session was 180 ± 22 kcal, and the time required for an MICT
session was established to 40 min. Therefore, each HIIT + RT
session lasted 40 min (20 min of HIIT and 20 min of RT).
Participants performed three exercise sessions per week for
12 wk (total = 36 sessions). Sessions were generally in the
morning on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, to allow a suf-
ficient recovery period, and were supervised by an experi-
enced physical activity instructor. Each session included
also 5-min warm-up and 2-min cooldown periods, in addition
to the formal training.
MICT. The MICT session consisted of 40 min at 55%–60%
of the participant’s PPO performed continuously on a C-Max
Club Fitness bike. During the first 6 wk, the intensity was
set at 55% of the PPO and was increased to 60% for the last
6 wk to take into account the participants’aerobic fitness
improvement. Each participant’s resistance, pedal cadence
(50–70 rpm), and power (W) were controlled to reach the
expected intensity.
HIIT. The HIIT training program was based on the protocol
by Maillard et al. (16), an attractive and feasible cycling
program for postmenopausal women who are overweight
or obese. The HIIT protocol consisted of repeated cycles
of sprinting/speeding for 8 s followed by slow pedaling
(20–30 rpm) for 12 s on a WattBike pro Concept2 (with a
freewheel and a double air and magnetic braking system).
Resistance was very low to facilitate acceleration and limit
bicycle–wheel inertia. Resistance was controlled to reach
~80% of each participant’s PHR during the 20-min session.
All participants could complete the full 20-min exercise
program at this intensity after two or three sessions. HR was
continuously monitored (A300, Polar, Finland) to control the
intensity. Overall, the mean intensity during an HIIT session
corresponded to 85% ± 4% of PHR.
HIIT + RT. HIIT was always performed before RT to nor-
malize the concurrent training effects (25). The HIIT session
was the same as for the HIIT alone group. The upper- and
lower-body muscular strength was measured using the one-
repetition maximum (1RM) method with bench press and
leg press exercises on UniversalTM weight machines, as
previously described (26). Briefly, a warm-up of 5–10 rep-
etitions at 40%–60% of the perceived maximum was per-
formed, followed by 3–5 repetitions at 60%–80% of the
perceived maximum. Three to four subsequent attempts were
then made to determine the 1RM for each exercise. Rest
periods (3–5 min) were introduced between lifts to ensure
optimal recovery.
The RT program included two different training circuits
with 10 exercises/each and was based on the program by Marx
et al. (27). Circuit 1 included leg press, bench press, knee ex-
tension, cable row, dumbbell calf raise, elbow flexion, abdom-
inal muscle, triceps exercises with upper pulley, plank, and
bum exercises. Circuit 2 included knees extension, pullover,
leg press, side raise with dumbbells, dumbbell calf raise, tri-
ceps exercises with upper pulley, hip thrust, chin rowing,
and plank to upright row. Participants performed a single-set
circuit, with a load of 8–12 repetitions at around 80% of
1RM, with 1- to 1.5-min rest period between exercises. The
workouts were individually supervised by the same certified
personal trainer. When participants achieved more than 12RM,
the load was adjusted to remain in the planned intensity zone.
Participant alternated between circuits every 3 wk to minimize
boredom and to create some variation in the exercise choice.
RMR and substrate oxidation. Subjects arrived at the
laboratory at 7:30 AM after overnight fast (12 h). Participants
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, BODY COMPOSITION, AND WOMEN Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
®
3
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
were asked to eat a similar dinner for the pre- and posttraining
session the evening before and to avoid any kind of strenuous
exercise the day before. The experiment was conducted in a
ventilated room at a temperature of 19°C–20°C. RMR and
substrate oxidation were determined from respiratory gases
using a Metamax 3B apparatus (Matsport, France). Carbohy-
drate oxidation and FatOx were measured at rest, during mod-
erate-intensity prolonged exercise, and during the recovery
period. Exercise consisted in 40 min of cycling at 55% of their
PPO determined before and after training on a cycle ergometer
(Ergoline, Bitz, Germany). Cadence was maintained between
60 and 70 rpm. HR was continuously monitored (A300, Polar,
Finland). Resting gas exchange data were recorded for 10 min,
with the subject sitting on the bicycle. The last 2 min of gas
exchange data from each stage were averaged to calculate
V
˙O
2
and V
˙CO
2
that were then used to determine the RER
(RER = V
˙CO
2
/V
˙O
2
). Recording was continued during the
recovery period for 20 min.
RMR assessment was considered valid in the presence of a
minimum of 10 min of steady state with less than 10% of fluc-
tuations in oxygen consumption (V
˙O
2
). RMR (kcal·d
−1
)was
calculated using the Weir equation (28), and substrate oxida-
tion (g·min
−1
) was calculated using the Frayn’sequations
(29), as follows:
RMR ¼3:941 V
̇
O2
þ1:1106 V
̇
CO2
1440:
carbohydrate CHOðÞoxidation ¼4:55 V
̇
CO2
−3:21 V
̇
O2
:
FatOx ¼1:67 ̇
VO2
−1:67 ̇
VO2
:
Physical activity and dietary assessments. Partici-
pants were asked to maintain their normal levels of physical
activity during the 12-wk study period. Their usual weekly
level of physical activity was determined at baseline and after
12 wk using the French version of the GPAQ (23). They were
also asked to maintain their normal eating habits for the study
period. At baseline and at week 12 of training, each participant
filled in a 7-d food intake diary that was evaluated by a dieti-
cian using a nutrition analysis software program (Nutrilog®,
Marans, France).
Biochemical assays. Blood samples were taken the
week before starting the training (preintervention) and then
2–4 d after thelast exercise session (postintervention), depend-
ing on the participants’availability and to avoid any potential
effect of the last exercise session on the results. After overnight
fasting, a cannula was inserted in the antecubital vein, and
whole blood was collected in EDTA- and fluoride-containing
vacutainers tubes. The plasma concentration of total cholesterol
(TC), HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TG) was
immediately measured, using a Synchron Clinical System
UniCel DxC analyzer (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA) and a
cholesterol oxidase method for TC (CHOL reagent), a direct
homogeneous method for HDL-C (HDLD reagent), and a
lipase/glycerol kinase method for TG (GPO reagent). The
LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) fraction was indirectly quantified
using the equation described by Friedewaldet al. (30). Plasma
glucose concentration was immediately determined using the
hexokinase method (UniCel DxC analyzer, Synchron). Plasma
insulin concentration was measured by enzyme-linked immu-
nosorbent assay from Sigma-Aldrich Insulin Elisa kit (Paris,
France). HbA1c values were evaluated with a high-performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC) Variant II analyzer equipped
with the new 270–2101 NU Kit (Bio-RadLaboratories,
Hercules, CA).
The HOMA-IR index was calculated using the following
formula: HOMA-IR = [Fasting glucose (mmol·L
−1
)Fasting
insulin (μU·mL
−1
)]/22.5.
Statistical analyses. Before the study start, the sample
size required for a statistical power of 80% was calculated
based on previous results on FM loss after HIIT training in
women (31). On the basis of a two-sided type I error of 5%,
a minimum difference of 1.5 ± 0.88 kg, as described by
Tremblay et al. (32), for FM loss could be detected with seven
women per group. Our samplewas increased to 10 women per
group at the beginning of the intervention to take into account
participants lost to follow-up.
All statistical analyses were carried out with the STATISTICA
version 12.00 software (StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK). Data are
presented as the mean ± SD. The data normal distribution
was tested using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, and the ho-
mogeneity of variance was tested with the F-test. Data were
log-transformed, when appropriate, before statistical analyses.
Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to determine
group and time effects and group–time interactions. When a
significant effect was found, post hoc multiple comparisons
were performed using the Newman–Keuls test. The effect size
was reported when significant main or interaction effects were
detected. The effect size was assessed using the partial eta-squared
(η
2
) and ranked as follows: ∼0.01 = small effect, ∼0.06 = mod-
erate effect, ≥0.14 = large effect (33). Baseline values and
changes between the baseline and the study end (delta change:
[12 wk–baseline/baseline] 100) were also compared among
groups, using one-way ANOVA. Differences with a Pvalue
≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
Participants’characteristics. Of the 30 postmenopausal
females randomized in the three training groups (n= 10/group),
27 were retained for the analysis (n= 3 left the study for differ-
ent reasons listed in Fig. 1). At baseline, the mean age was not
significantly different among groups (MICT, 67.1 ± 7.2 yr;
HIIT, 59.9 ± 5.9 yr; HIIT + RT, 61.1 ± 5.4 yr) as well as total
body weight (MICT, 80.4 ± 7.1 kg; HIIT, 81.6 ± 12.7 kg;
HIIT + RT, 75.6 ± 8.9 kg) and total FM (MICT, 30.6 ± 5.3 kg;
HIIT, 27.6 ± 10.7 kg; HIIT + RT, 28.1 ± 5.8 kg) ( T1Table 1).
The participants’compliance with the training program was
97% ± 1%. No adverse event was reported during testing or
training in any group.
http://www.acsm-msse.org4Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Habitual energy intake and EE. Physical activity levels
(GPAQ scores) were comparable between pre- and posttraining
in all groups. For all participants, the daily energy intake and the
percentage of energy contribution from macronutrients did not
significantly change during the intervention period. No signifi-
cant dietary intake difference was observed in the three groups
at baseline and after 3 months (mean values, 1563 kcal ±276
preintervention vs 1557 kcal ±255 postintervention).
Aerobic fitness. V
˙O
2max
(mL·kg
−1
⋅min
−1
) and PPO (watts
or Wkg
−1
) were not different in the three groups at baseline
(Table 1). Overall, aerobic fitness (V
˙O
2max
and PPO) signifi-
cantly increased after the 12-wk intervention (time effect,
P< 0.0001, η
2
= 0.71). A group effect was noted concerning
V
˙O
2max
(mL·kg
−1
⋅min
−1
) and PPO (when expressed in watts,
but not in Wkg
−1
) with lower values in the MICT group than
in the HIIT and HIIT + RT groups (P=0.042,η
2
=0.24).
Anthropometric measurements and whole-body
composition. Overall, body weight (kg), total FM (kg),
and waist and hip circumferences (cm) were significantly de-
creased after the 12-wk intervention (time effect, P=0.02,
η
2
=0.21;P=0.002,η
2
=0.34;P=0.01,η
2
=0.44;
P=0.001,η
2
= 0.37, respectively) (Table 1). When the abso-
lute values were expressed in percentage (%), total FM de-
creased and FFM and muscle mass increased only in the
HIIT + RT group (P=0.02,η
2
= 0.20). The percentage of total
FM loss (kg) was higher (but not significant, P= 0.07) in the
HIIT and HIIT + RT groups than that in the MICT group
(−3.06% ± 4.2%, −4.43% ± 3.1%, and −0.05% ± 3.9%, re-
spectively), but with a large size effect (η
2
=0.19)( F2Fig. 2).
Abdominal and visceral FM. Baseline total abdominal
(kg) and visceral FM (kg) were similar in the three groups.
At the end of the training period, total abdominal FM (kg)
TABLE 1. Anthropometric measurements, body composition, and aerobic fitness in the MICT, HIIT, and HIIT + RT groups at baseline (pre) and at the end (post) of the training programs.
MICT HIIT HIIT + RT ANOVA (P), η
2
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post G T G T
BMI (kg·m
−2
) 31.2±3.0 30.9±2.8 31.5±4.3 31.1±4.4 31.4±4.0 31.1±3.7 0.99 0.02 0.98
0.00 0.21 0.00
Waist circumference (cm) 100.8 ± 5.4 99.2 ± 6.0 100.9 ± 9.3 97.1 ± 8.8 101.4 ± 10.0 98.8 ± 10.8 0.91 0.01 0.44
0.00 0.44 0.09
Hip circumference (cm) 109.7 ± 6.6 107.2 ± 7.3 110.1 ± 9.1 107.8 ± 7.6 106.3 ± 9.6 104.3 ± 8.1 0.58 0.001 0.97
0.04 0.44 0.09
Body weight (kg) 80.5 ± 7.1 79.7 ± 7.3 81.6 ± 12.7 80.8 ± 12.9 75.6 ± 8.9 74.9 ± 8.0 0.41 0.02 0.95
0.07 0.21 0.00
Total FM (kg) 30.7 ± 5.3 30.7 ± 5.4 27.7 ± 10.7 27.1 ± 10.6 28.1 ± 1.9 26.8 ± 1.8 0.50 0.002 0.06
0.06 0.34 0.21
Total FM (%) 37.9 ± 4.0 38.3 ± 4.4 33.7 ± 11.6 33.4 ± 11.5 36.9 ± 3.8 35.5 ± 3.8* 0.66 0.02 0.03
0.03 0.20 0.25
Total FFM (kg) 49.8 ± 3.7 49.1 ± 4.0 45.1 ± 15.6 44.9 ± 15.5 47.6 ± 4.2 48.1 ± 3.6 0.41 0.88 0.19
0.07 0.00 0.13
Total FFM (%) 62.1 ± 4.0 61.7 ± 4.4 56.3 ± 19.3 56.7 ± 19.3 64.1 ± 3.8 64.5 ± 3.9* 0.67 0.02 0.03
0.03 0.20 0.25
Muscle mass (kg) 47.7 ± 3.6 47.1 ± 3.9 43.3 ± 14.9 43.1 ± 14.9 45.7 ± 4.0 46.1 ± 3.3 0.44 0.79 0.29
0.07 0.00 0.10
Muscle mass (%) 59.5 ± 3.9 59.2 ± 4.2 54.0 ± 18.5 54.3 ± 18.6 60.7 ± 3.8 62.0 ± 3.9* 0.61 0.02 0.03
0.04 0.19 0.25
Total abdominal FM (kg) 7.6 ± 1.7 7.6 ± 1.7 7.4 ± 1.9 6.9 ± 1.9* 7.2 ± 1.7 6.5 ± 1.7* 0.67 ≤10
−8
≤10
−4
0.03 0.73 0.48
Visceral FM (kg) 4.2 ± 1.7 4.4 ± 1.8 4.5 ± 1.1 4.3 ± 1.0 3.1 ± 1.4 2.9 ± 1.4**
,
*** 0.08 0.48 0.02
0.19 0.02 0.27
V̇O
2max
(mL·min
−1
·kg
−1
) 25.3±2.8 28.5±2.9 30.5±6.9 35.6±6.4 31.5±4.1 35.0±4.1 0.04 ≤10
−7
0.25
0.24 0.71 0.11
PPO(W) 85±9 102±12 96±23 122±21 104±13 120±14 0.04 ≤10
−7
0.34
0.24 0.71 0.09
PPO (W·kg
−1
) 1.1±0.1 1.3±0.2 1.2±0.4 1.4±0.7 1.4±0.2 1.6±0.2 0.1 ≤10
−7
0.30
0.18 0.76 0.10
Values are presented as mean ± SD. Muscle mass = FFM –bone mineral content from DXA.
*P≤0.005 (pre vs post in the same group).
**P≤0.05 (HIIT + RT vs MICT).
***P≤0.05 (HIIT + RT vs HIIT).
G, group effect; T, time effect; G T, group–time interaction; FFM, free-fat mass.
FIGURE 2—Body composition AQ2changes (based on dual-energy x-ray
absorptiometry imaging) between the baseline and the end of the 12-wk
training program in the MICT (n= 8), HIIT (n= 10), and HIIT + RT
(n= 9) groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD. delta change
(%) = [(12 wk −baseline/baseline) 100]. #P≤0.01: HIIT + RT vs
MICT group. $P≤0.01: HIIT vs MICT group.
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, BODY COMPOSITION, AND WOMEN Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
®
5
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
was significantly reduced only in the HIIT and HIIT+RT
groups (group–time interaction; P<0.008,η
2
=0.48)
(Table 1). When expressed as delta change values, abdominal
and visceral FM changes were reduced only in the HIIT and
HIIT + RT groups and were significantly different from MICT
(Fig. 2). No significant difference was noted after training
between the HIIT and the HIIT + RT groups.
RMR, substrate oxidation, and EE. None of the train-
ing modes altered RMR (kcal·d
−1
) and substrate oxidation at
rest (
T2 Table 2). Overall, all training programs increased FatOx
during moderate-intensity exercise (expressed as percentage
of EE or g·min
−1
) and during the recovery period (time effect,
P<10
−4
,η
2
= 0.47) (F3 Fig. 3). Concomitantly, carbohydrate
oxidation decreased. No group effect was noted. EE (kcal)
during exercise and during recovery did not change between
pre- and postintervention in any group.
Metabolic profile. The lipid profile and glycemic param-
eters at baseline and after the 12-wk intervention are listed in
T3 Table 3. Overall, plasma TG levels decreased after the inter-
vention (time effect, P=0.02,η
2
= 0.22), without any group
effect or group–time interaction. Whatever the training mode,
TC, HDL-C, and LDL-C levels did not change. Glycemia,
insulinemia, HbA1c, and HOMA-IR were not modified by
the intervention.
DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to compare the body composition
and FatOx changes induced by a 12-wk MICT, HIIT, or
HIIT + RT intervention in postmenopausal women who were
TABLE 2. Substrate utilization and EE at rest, during moderate-intensity continuous exercise (50% of PPO), and during the 20-min recovery time in the MICT,HIIT,andHIIT+RTgroupsat
baseline (pre) and after (post) the training programs.
MICT HIIT HIIT +RT ANOVA (P), η
2
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post G T G T
Rest
RMR (kcal·d
−1
) 1403 ± 259 1430 ± 259 1615 ± 206 1514 ± 230 1426 ± 317 1392 ± 317 0.23 0.56 0.68
0.11 0.01 0.03
FatOx (g·min
−1
) 0.05 ± 0.02 0.05 ± 0.02 0.06 ± 0.02 0.06 ± 0.02 0.04 ± 0.02 0.05 ± 0.01 0.23 0.47 0.98
0.12 0.02 0.00
FatOx (%) 48.5 ± 17.5 50.3 ± 15.0 48.0 ± 14.5 53.7 ± 12.8 44.2 ± 15.5 48.8 ± 8.5 0.67 0.26 0.90
0.03 0.05 0.00
CHOOx (g·min
−1
) 0.14 ± 0.04 0.14 ± 0.03 0.16 ± 0.05 0.13 ± 0.04 0.16 ± 0.06 0.14 ± 0.05 0.73 0.16 0.95
0.02 0.08 0.05
CHOOx (%) 51.5 ± 17.5 49.7 ± 15.0 52.0 ± 14.5 46.3 ± 12.8 55.9 ± 15.5 51.3 ± 8.5 0.67 0.26 0.90
0.03 0.05 0.00
EE (kcal·min
−1
) 0.97 ± 0.18 0.99 ± 0.17 1.12 ± 0.14 1.05 ± 0.16 0.99 ± 0.22 0.97 ± 0.22 0.23 0.56 0.69
0.11 0.01 0.03
Exercise
FatOx (g·min
−1
) 0.17 ± 0.03 0.21 ± 0.05 0.16 ± 0.03 0.22 ± 0.06 0.18 ± 0.03 0.22 ± 0.05 0.68 ≤10
−5
0.81
0.03 0.48 0.02
FatOx (%) 41.9 ± 5.7 51.8 ± 10.8 39.8 ± 5.5 50.7 ± 11.1 40.6 ± 5.2 53.6 ± 10.9 0.72 ≤10
−4
0.89
0.03 0.44 0.01
CHOOx (g·min
−1
) 0.60 ± 0.7 0.52 ± 0.12 0.67 ± 0.18 0.57 ± 0.15 0.72 ± 0.18 0.52 ± 0.17 0.46 0.006 0.46
0.06 0.27 0.06
CHOOx (%) 58.1 ± 5.7 48.2 ± 10.8 60.2 ± 5.5 49.3 ± 11.1 59.4 ± 5.2 46.3 ± 10.9 0.72 ≤10
−4
0.89
0.03 0.44 0.01
EE (kcal·min
−1
) 3.7±0.3 3.9±0.4 4.0±0.8 4.0±0.7 4.3±0.9 4.0±0.6 0.45 0.63 0.29
0.06 0.00 0.10
Recovery
FatOx (g·min
−1
) 0.08 ± 0.03 0.09 ± 0.03 0.08 ± 0.03 0.08 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.02 0.07 ± 0.02 0.69 ≤10
−5
0.81
0.03 0.48 0.02
FatOx (%) 52.5 ± 10.8 57.2 ± 12.1 52.6 ± 10.8 55.9 ± 11.0 47.6 ± 12.3 53.9 ± 10.0 0.72 ≤10
−4
0.89
0.03 0.44 0.01
CHOOx (g·min
−1
) 0.20 ± 0.05 0.21 ± 0.10 0.18 ± 0.04 0.18 ± 0.09 0.21 ± 0.06 0.17 ± 0.06 0.47 0.006 0.45
0.06 0.27 0.06
CHOOx (%) 47.5 ± 10.8 42.8 ± 12.1 47.4 ± 10.8 44.1 ± 11.0 52.4 ± 12.3 46.0 ± 10.0 0.72 ≤10
−4
0.89
0.03 0.44 0.01
EE (kcal·min
−1
) 1.5±0.3 1.6±0.4 1.4±0.3 1.4±0.6 1.4±0.3 1.3±0.3 0.45 0.63 0.29
0.06 0.01 0.10
Values are presented as mean ± SD.
G, group effect; T, time effect; G T, group–time interaction; CHOOx, carbohydrate oxidation.
FIGURE 3—FatOx (g·min
−1
)AQ2at rest, during exercise (50% of PPO), and
during the 20-min recovery in the MICT (n= 8), HIIT (n=10),and
HIIT + RT (n= 9) groups at baseline and after the 12-wk intervention.
Data are presented as mean ± SD. The values at rest correspond to the
mean of the last 5 min. The values during the recovery period correspond
to the mean of the 20-min postexercise period. Six values are presented for
the cycling exercise period (at 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 min of exercise).
***Time effect (pre- vs postintervention), P≤0.005.
http://www.acsm-msse.org6Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
overweight or obese. All three modalities improved body
composition (body weight, FM loss), but HIIT (alone and with
RT) led to a greater percentage of FM loss. Moreover, abdom-
inal and visceral FM (%) were only reduced in the HIIT and
HIIT + RT groups and were significantly different from
MICT. Our results also indicate that HIIT-induced total or
(intra)-abdominal FM losses were not related to higher FatOx
during moderate-intensity exercise or during the 20-min post-
exercise period.
Physical activity is recommended in the framework of
weight management programs to prevent weight gain, to in-
duce weight loss, and to avoid weight regain after weight loss.
Indeed, exercise on its own may generate significant weight
and FM loss (10) with beneficial effects on health (11). Fur-
thermore, (intra)-abdominal FM reduction is of interest due
to FM association with CVD risks (34). The current interna-
tional guidelines generally suggest endurance training as the
best strategy for weight loss and FM reduction in both sexes.
In the last position stand by the American College of Sports
Medicine (11), moderate-intensity physical activity (between
150 and 250 min·wk
−1
) is recommended for preventing weight
gain, and more exercise for providing significant weight loss.
Recent evidence suggests that HIIT can be a time-efficient
strategy to decrease whole-body and (intra)-abdominal FM
in sedentary overweight/obese individuals (15,35). In their
meta-analysis, Wewege et al. (35) evaluated the effect of HIIT
and MICT on weight and FM changes in overweight and
obese individuals. They found that both HIIT and MICT pro-
grams improved FM and waist circumference, even in the ab-
sence of body weight changes. They also showed that HIIT
and MICT were similarly efficient, but that HIIT training re-
quired ~40% less time commitment. The meta-analysis by
Maillard et al. (15) focused on HIIT effects on whole-body
and (intra)-abdominal FM loss in normal weight and over-
weight/obese individuals. The authors confirmed that HIIT is
a time-efficient strategy to decrease not only whole-body FM
but also abdominal and visceral FM. On the other hand, results
were less convincing in postmenopausal women. Indeed, only
three studies have evaluated the effects of HIIT on body
composition in this population (16,36,37), and only one showed
a positive effect of HIIT on total and (intra)-abdominal FM loss
(16). To our knowledge, no study is available on the effects of
HIIT + RT on body composition in postmenopausal women.
Our results indicate that MICT, HIIT, and HIIT + RT pro-
grams (3 sessions per week, 12 wk) decrease body weight,
waist and hip circumferences, and whole-body FM in post-
menopausal women who are overweight/obese. This confirms
the conclusions of the two previously mentioned meta-
analyses. However, when expressed as delta change values
(post–pre/pre 100), our study showed that in postmenopausal
women, FM losses were significantly higher in the HIIT and
HIIT + RT (−3.1kgand−4.4 kg, respectively) than in the
MICT group (−0.1 kg). Compared with the three studies on
postmenopausal women and HIIT-induced body composition
changes, our results are similar to those of the study performed
by Maillard et al. (16), but in contradiction with those reported
by Mandrup et al. (36) and Steckling et al. (37) who did not
detect any HIIT effect on total FM. These discrepancies could
be explained by the different exercise modalities (14). Indeed,
we used the same HIIT protocol as Maillard et al. (16) (i.e.,
60 8 s at 80%–90% of PHR, 12 s active recovery), whereas
Mandrup et al. (36) and Steckling et al. (37) used three blocks
of varying intervals with multiple periods of maximum per-
formance for 1 h and 4 4 min 90% HR
max
+ 3 min active
recovery 70 HR
max
, respectively. Furthermore, in the study
by Mandrup et al. (36), women were not obese, and it is well
known that HIIT-induced FM loss is more effective in obese
individuals (15). Finally, Mandrup et al. and Steckling et al.
did not evaluate dietary intakes and/or physical activity levels
during their interventions. A spontaneous increase of energy
intake or a decrease in total EE could explain the absence of
effect on FM in these works. In our study, the levels of phys-
ical activity and total energy intake remained unchanged,
strengthening our conclusion that HIIT is an efficient strategy
to lose body weight and FM in postmenopausal women who
are overweight/obese.
At baseline, the plasma values were within the normal ranges,
and this may explain why training did not modify the lipid profile
TABLE 3. Glycemic control and lipid profile in the MICT, HIIT, and HIIT + RT groups at baseline (pre) and after (post) the training programs.
MICT HIIT HIIT + RT ANOVA (P), η
2
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post G T G T
Glycemia (mmol·L
−1
) 1.2 ± 0.7 1.2 ± 0.4 1.2 ± 0.3 1.2 ± 0.3 1.2 ± 0.6 1.2 ± 0.7 0.19 0.47 0.74
0.13 0.02 0.03
Insulinemia (μU·L
−1
) 11.2 ± 3.0 9.1 ± 3.3 12.9 ± 14.8 12.5 ± 13.0 11.5 ± 3.3 11.7 ± 4.4 0.82 0.27 0.79
0.02 0.05 0.03
HbA1c (%) 5.6 ± 0.5 5.5 ± 0.4 6.1 ± 0.9 6.0 ± 0.7 5.8 ± 0.2 5.7 ± 0.2 0.19 0.52 0.50
0.13 0.02 0.06
HOMA-IR 3.0 ± 1.2 2.2 ± 0.8 3.9 ± 4.7 3.8 ± 4.4 2.8 ± 0.8 3.0 ± 1.4 0.64 0.39 0.42
0.04 0.03 0.07
TC (mmol·L
–1
) 6.3 ± 1.3 6.3 ± 1.3 5.6 ± 1.1 5.4 ± 1.2 6.2 ± 1.0 6.2 ± 1.0 0.27 0.43 0.86
0.10 0.03 0.01
HDL-C (mmol·L
−1
) 1.7 ± 0.4 1.6 ± 0.1 1.7 ± 0.9 1.7 ± 0.5 1.7 ± 0.5 1.7 ± 0.4 0.82 0.77 0.69
0.01 0.00 0.03
LDL-C (mmol·L
−1
) 3.5 ± 1.6 3.6 ± 1.4 3.3 ± 0.8 3.4 ± 0.8 3.9 ± 1.0 3.9 ± 0.8 0.40 0.83 0.79
0.08 0.00 0.02
TG (mmol·L
−1
) 1.4 ± 1.1 1.1 ± 0.5 1.2 ± 0.7 0.9 ± 0.4 1.2 ± 0.5 1.2 ± 0.6 0.43 0.02 0.41
0.07 0.22 0.07
Values are presented as mean ± SD.
G, group effect; T, time effect; G T, group–time interaction; C, cholesterol; TG, triglycerides.
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, BODY COMPOSITION, AND WOMEN Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
®
7
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
and glucose homeostasis. Although our participants did not
have hypertriglyceridemia (defined as a TG concentration
higher than 150 mg·dL
−1
or 1.7 mmol·L
−1
) and higher risk
of CVD (38), we observed a decrease of TG levels over time,
but without difference between groups.
Our results also demonstrate that only HIIT and HIIT + RT
significantly decreased (intra)-abdominal FM (i.e., subcutane-
ous FM from the abdomen and visceral FM). Itis worth noting
that despite exercising almost half the time compared with the
MICT group (20 vs 40 min), women in the HIIT group lost
7.4% of total abdominal FM and 3.2% of visceral FM. Con-
versely, no change was observed in the MICT group, and the
total abdominal FM loss in the HIIT + RT group was not
higher than inthe HIIT group, despite the longer exercise time
(40 min). These results confirm the meta-analysis by Maillard
et al. (15) showing that HIIT significantly reduces abdominal
(P= 0.007) and visceral (P= 0.018) FM, with no difference
between men and women.
The mechanisms underlying HIIT-induced total and (intra)-
abdominal FM loss are still not completely elucidated but
might partly be explained by significant higher lipolysis dur-
ing exercise and greater postexercise total and abdominal
FatOx (15). These adaptations are probably facilitated by the
higher excess postexercise oxygen consumption observed af-
ter exercises performed above 75% V
˙O
2max
(39). Indeed, lipid
oxidation decreases above 40%–50% V
˙O
2max
, but higher in-
tensities still induce significant lipolysis from β-adrenergic
receptors stimulation. Thus, HIIT can increase plasma FFA
levels during exercise and then promote greater FatOx during
the recovery period. This adaptation could explain why peo-
ple who are engaged in regular vigorous physical activities
are less fat than those who never take part in such activities
(32). After an acute session of HIIT, MICT, or high-intensity
resistance training (HIRT
AQ3 ) performed by recreationally active
women, Wingfield et al. (40) demonstrated lower RER in the
HIIT than the MICT and HIRT
AQ3 groups (30 and 60 min of re-
covery), confirming the higher postexercise FatOx in HIIT.
It is now recognized that higher amount of visceral/abdominal
fat is lost in HIIT compared with MICT programs (15). As the
content of β-adrenergic receptors is higher in intra-abdominal
than in subcutaneous adipose tissue (41), the higher HIIT-
induced sympathetic nervous system stimulation could explain
the larger reliance on visceral FM. Moreover, visceral adipose
tissue is characterized by smaller adipocytes, greater lipolytic
activity, and lower responses to the antilipolytic effects of
insulin compared with subcutaneous depots (42). Lastly,
subcutaneous or (intra)-abdominal FM losses may also be
facilitated by HIIT-induced PGC1-αtranscription stimula-
tion.ShirvanyandArabzadeh(43)recentlyproposedthat
theincreaseofPGC1-αexpression in muscle tissue may in-
duce endocrine effects on adipose tissue and adipokines,
leading to higher FatOx. Altogether, this may explain why
HIIT promotes greater abdominal and visceral FM losses
compared with the traditional MICT.
We also made the hypothesis that HIIT, compared with
MICT, might increase FatOx at rest and during free-living
physical activities (walking, cycling, gardening, etc.) by altering
metabolic flexibility. To test this hypothesis, we determined
FatOx before and after the training period at rest and during a
moderate-intensity exercise (40 min at 50% of PPO) and during
the 20-min recovery time. None of the training modes altered
RMR (kcal·d
−1
) and substrate oxidation at rest. As expected,
FatOx levels were significantly increased, but without any dif-
ference among the three groups. The mean FatOx change
measured after training (~+32%) was similar to what was re-
ported by other studies using the same amount of activity
(12 wk/3 times per week). For example, Talanian et al. (44)
showed an increase of 36% in whole-body FatOx during a
1-h cycling performed at 60% V
˙O
2peak
after an HIIT program
(2 wk, 7 sessions including 10 4 min at 90% V
˙O
2peak
with
2 min recovery) in young sedentary women who are over-
weight or obese. Our study, which was the first to compare
FatOx in postmenopausal women who were overweight/obese
at rest, during moderate-intensity physical activity and during
the recovery period after three different training programs, did
not find a greater effect of HIIT on metabolic flexibility and
no correlation appeared between FatOx and total or (intra)-
abdominal FM loss. Thus, the hypothesis of a greater FatOx
after HIIT programs was not verified in postmenopausal
women and cannotexplain the larger adipose tissue reduction.
Our study also examined the effects of HIIT combined with
RT on body composition in postmenopausal women. An in-
crease of muscle mass after HIIT + RT program might enhance
RMR and, therefore, the 24-h EE. The 24-h EE increase could
favor in turn body FM loss because a part of the EE is provided
through lipid oxidation. The recent meta-analysis by Sabag et al.
(45) shows that HIIT + RT leads to similar muscle mass gain
(hypertrophy) as RT alone. Furthermore, concurrent HIIT and
RT do not negatively affect muscle mass gain. However, these
results should be considered with caution because this meta-
analysis concerned 263 young participants (18–34 yr) among
whom only 33 were inactive or untrained. Thus, these conclu-
sions are probably more adapted to young athletes than to indi-
viduals who are overweight/obese.
In our study, loss of total and (intra)-abdominal FM was not
significantly different in the HIIT and HIIT + RT groups. In
fact, the lack of muscle mass gain (kg) in the HIIT + RT group
could explain this finding. Indeed, the duration or volume and/
or intensity of the RT protocols in our study could have been
insufficient to induce a significant increase of muscle mass.
It is not possible to compare our results with the literature be-
cause this is the first study dealing with HIIT + RT effects on
body composition in postmenopausal women. However, three
studies on endurance training + RT have been performed. For
example, Martin et al. (46) did not find any effect of HIIT or
combined training (aerobic + resistance exercises) on total
body fat (%) and muscle mass index (kg.m
−2
) in postmeno-
pausal women after a 12-wk intervention. Davidson et al. (42)
found greater total, abdominal, and visceral FM losses after
a 6-month MICT + RT program (30 min walking at 65%–70%
V
˙O
2max
+ 9 resistance exercises, 3 d·wk-1) compared with MICT
or RT alone in older obese adults. These adaptations were
http://www.acsm-msse.org8Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
associated with significant skeletal muscle gain, which may
confirm the potential link between muscle mass gain and FM
loss after RT. Finally, Nunes et al. (47) demonstrated a decrease
of whole-body FM (−0.3%) after a 12-wk MICT + RT program
(60 min of walking at 70% of PHR and resistance exercises at
70%of1RM;3d·wk
−1
) in postmenopausal women. However,
they did give any information on FFM and muscle mass
changes. Additional studies using different RT modalities
(duration, volume, and intensity) are probably needed to deter-
mine whether RT alone or together with HIIT might promote
muscle mass gain in postmenopausal women, leading to sig-
nificant FM loss.
One of the limitations of this study concerns the groups
tested. Indeed, it is difficult to conclude about a potential effect
of HIIT + RT without knowing whether the RT intervention
alone could induce positive adaptations. Thus, to determine
whether the RT intervention can favor muscle adaptations, it
would have been interesting to add also an RT group. We de-
cided to have the same session duration for the MICT and
HIIT + RT programs because a lack of time has been cited
as a barrier for overweight/obese people. This limited the
amount of RT work, and this might not have been enough to
induce muscle mass gain, especially in women. Furthermore,
we can also hypothesize that the HIIT + RT combination
may alter muscle adaptations by inducing molecular pathway
interferences between training modalities. Indeed, it has been
suggested that endurance training performed before RT nega-
tively affects RT adaptations through inhibition of the AKT–
mTOR pathway activation by AMPK (25). Finally, a last group,
MICT+ RT, might induce different adaptations but appeared
to us less attractive due to the duration of the session (≥1h).
In conclusion, a 12-wk cycling MICT or HIIT ± RT program
(3 sessions per week) can be proposed to nondieting postmeno-
pausal women who are overweight/obese to decrease weight
and whole-body FM. HIIT programs seems more successful
in reducing (intra)-abdominal FM than the traditional moderate
continuous training. As the level of subcutaneous abdominal
and visceral FM is correlated with the CVD risk, this study
confirms that HIIT is an effective and time-efficient modality
to reduce such risk in this population. HIIT + RT did not po-
tentiate this effect but improved body composition by in-
creasing the percentage of FFM, including muscle mass.
HIIT-induced greater total and (intra)-abdominal FM loss is
not related to changes in metabolic flexibility at rest, during
moderate-intensity exercise, or during the recovery period.
Additional studies are needed to better understand the under-
lying mechanisms of HIIT-induced FM loss and to determine
whether the concomitant muscle mass gain induced by RT
potentiates these adaptations.
The authors want to thank all the study participants for their kind
collaboration, the nurse, Anne Misson, Cyril Chomarat, and Renaud
Laurent for their kind assistance during the training sessions and their
help in data collection.
The results of this study are presented clearly, honestly, and without
fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The results
of the present study do not constitute endorsement by the American
College of Sports Medicine.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
M. D. was a PhD student on the MATISSE study and designed and
supervised the different training modalities. She met all participants,
collected and analyzed all HR monitoring data during training, super-
vised training sessions, collected and analyzed the data obtained for
RMR and during the prolonged exercise (FatOx measurements), car-
ried out the anthropometric measurements, and wrote the first and
subsequent drafts of the article. M. R. was a coinvestigator and assisted
with the study design. C. M., P. B., and M. D. were the physicians who
assisted with the study design and oversaw the medical aspects of the
study. A. B. and F. M. were the sport instructors who supervised training
sessions with MD and helped collected data for RMR and during the pro-
longed exercise (FatOx measurements). N. B. conceived the study idea
and was responsible for the overall study design and for monitoring data
collection. B. P. was responsible for all statistical analyses. All authors
read and approved the final manuscript.
The MATISSE Study was funded by the University of Clermont
Auvergne (AME2P laboratory). The funders had no role in the study
design, the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, the writing of
the manuscript, and the decision to submit the article for publication.
REFERENCES
1. Kanaley JA, Sames C, Swisher L, et al. Abdominal fat distribution in
pre- and postmenopausal women: the impact of physical activity, age,
and menopausal status. Metab Clin Exp. 2001;50(8):976–82.
2. Ley CJ, Lees B, Stevenson JC. Sex- and menopause-associated
changes in body-fat distribution. Am J Clin Nutr. 1992;55(5):950–4.
3. Svendsen OL, Hassager C, Christiansen C. Age- and menopause-
associated variations in body composition and fat distribution in
healthy women as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.
Metab Clin Exp. 1995;44(3):369–73.
4. Trémollieres FA, Pouilles JM, Ribot CA. Relative influence of age
and menopause on total and regional body composition changes in
postmenopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(6):1594–600.
5. Palmer BF, Clegg DJ. The sexual dimorphism of obesity. Mol Cell
Endocrinol. 2015;402:113–9.
6. Hodson L, Harnden K, Banerjee R, et al. Lower resting and total en-
ergy expenditure in postmenopausal compared with premenopausal
women matched for abdominal obesity. JNutrSci. 2014;3:e3.
7. Abildgaard J, Pedersen AT, Green CJ, et al. Menopauseis associated
with decreased whole body fat oxidation during exercise. Am J Phys-
iol Endocrinol Metab. 2013;304(11):E1227–36.
8. Lovejoy JC, Champagne CM, de Jonge L, Xie H, Smith SR. In-
creased visceral fat and decreased energy expenditure during
the menopausal transition. Int J Obes (Lond). 2008;32(6):
949–58.
9. Gavin KM, Kohrt WM, KlemmDJ, Melanson EL.Modulation of en-
ergy expenditure by estrogens and exercise in women. Exerc Sport
Sci Rev. 2018;46(4):232–9.
10. Verheggen RJHM, Maessen MFH, Green DJ, Hermus ARMM,
Hopman MTE. Thijssen DHT. A systematic review and meta-analysis
on the effects of exercise training versus hypocaloric diet: distinct
effects on body weight and visceral adipose tissue. Obes Rev. 2016;
17(8):664–90.
11. Donnelly JE, Blair SN, Jakicic JM, et al. American College of Sports
Medicine Position Stand: appropriate physical activity intervention
strategies for weight loss and prevention of weight regain for adults.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(2):459–71.
12. Zhang H, Tong TK, Qiu W, et al. Comparable effects of high-intensity
interval training and prolonged continuous exercise training on ab-
dominal visceral fat reduction in obese young women. J Diabetes
Res. 2017;2017:5071740.
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, BODY COMPOSITION, AND WOMEN Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
®
9
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
13. Frank LL, Sorensen BE, Yasui Y, et al. Effects of exercise on meta-
bolic risk variables in overweight postmenopausal women: a random-
ized clinical trial. Obes Res. 2005;13(3):615–25.
14. Weston KS, Wisløff U, Coombes JS. High-intensity interval training
in patients with lifestyle-induced cardiometabolic disease: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(16):1227–34.
15. Maillard F, Pereira B, Boisseau N. Effect of high-intensity interval
training on total, abdominal and visceral fat mass: a meta-analysis.
Sports Med. 2018;48(2):269–88.
16. Maillard F, Rousset S, PereiraB, et al. High-intensity interval training
reduces abdominal fat mass in postmenopausal women with type 2
diabetes. Diabetes Metab. 2016;42(6):433–41.
17. Romero-Arenas S, Martínez-Pascual M, Alcaraz PE. Impact of
resistance circuit training on neuromuscular, cardiorespiratory and
body composition adaptations in the elderly. Aging Dis. 2013;4(5):
256–63.
18. Willis LH, Slentz CA, Bateman LA, et al. Effects of aerobic and/or
resistance training on body mass and fat mass in overweight or obese
adults. J Appl Physiol. 2012;113(12):1831–7.
19. Robinson MM, Dasari S, Konopka AR, et al. Enhanced protein trans-
lation underlies improved metabolic and physical adaptations to dif-
ferent exercise training modes in young and old humans. Cell Metab.
2017;25(3):581–92.
20. Picó-Sirvent I, Aracil-Marco A, Pastor D, Moya-Ramón M. Effects
of a combined high-intensity interval training and resistance training
program in patients awaiting bariatric surgery: a pilot study. Sports
(Basel). 2019;7(3).
21. Astorino TA, Schubert MM, Palumbo E, Stirling D, McMillan DW.
Effect of two doses of interval training on maximal fat oxidation in
sedentary women. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013;45(10):1878–86.
22. Lemmer L, Fm I, As R, et al. Effect of strength training on resting
metabolic rate and physical activity: age and gender comparisons.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001;33(4):532–41.
23. Hallal PC, Andersen LB, BullFC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U.
Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and
prospects. The Lancet. 2012;380(9838):247–57.
24. Tanaka H, Monahan KD, Seals DR. Age-predicted maximal heart
rate revisited. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(1):153–6.
25. Methenitis S. A brief review on concurrent training: from labora-
tory to the field. Sports (Basel). 2018;6(4).
26. Knutzen K, Brilla L, Caine D. Validity of 1RM prediction equations
for older adults. J Strength Cond Res. 1999;13(3):242.
27. Marx JO, Ratamess NA, Nindl BC, et al. Low-volume circuit versus
high-volume periodized resistance training in women.Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 2001;33(4):635–43.
28. Weir JB. New methods for calculating metabolic rate with special
reference to protein metabolism. 1949. Nutrition. 1990;6(3):213–21.
29. Frayn KN. Calculation of substrate oxidation rates in vivo from gas-
eous exchange. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1983;
55(2):628–34.
30. Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS. Estimation of the
concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in plasma, with-
out use of the preparative ultracentrifuge. Clin Chem. 1972;18(6):
499–502.
31. Trapp EG, Chisholm DJ, Freund J, Boutcher SH. The effects of high-
intensity intermittent exercise training on fat loss and fasting insulin
levels of young women. Int J Obes (Lond). 2008;32(4):684–91.
32. TremblayA, Simoneau J-A, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity
on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism. 1994;
43(7):814–8.
33. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155–9.
34. Sam S. Differential effect of subcutaneous abdominal and visceral
adipose tissue on cardiometabolic risk. Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig.
2018;33(1).
35. Wewege M, van den Berg R, Ward RE, Keech A. The effects of high-
intensity interval training vs. moderate-intensity continuous training
on body composition in overweight and obese adults: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews. 2017;18(6):635–46.
36. Mandrup CM, Egelund J, Nyberg M, et al. Effects of high-intensity
training on cardiovascular risk factors in premenopausal and
postmenopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(4):
384.e1–384.e11.
37. Steckling FM, Farinha JB, Figueiredo FDC, et al. High-intensity inter-
val training improves inflammatory and adipokine profiles in postmen-
opausal women with metabolic syndrome. Arch Physiol Biochem.
2019;125(1):85–91.
38. Christian JB, Arondekar B, Buysman EK, Jacobson TA, Snipes
RG, Horwitz RI. Determining triglyceride reductions needed for clin-
ical impact in severe hypertriglyceridemia. Am J Med. 2014;127(1):
36–44.e1.
39. Bahr R, Sejersted OM. Effect of intensity of exercise on excess post-
exercise O2 consumption. Metab Clin Exp. 1991;40(8):836–41.
40. Wingfield HL, Smith-Ryan AE, Melvin MN, et al.The acute effect of
exercise modality and nutrition manipulations on post-exercise rest-
ing energy expenditure and respiratory exchange ratio in women: a
randomized trial. Sports Med Open. 2015;1(1):11.
41. Rebuffé-Scrive M, Anderson B, Olbe L, Björntorp P. Metabolism of
adipose tissue in intraabdominal depots in severely obese men and
women. Metab Clin Exp. 1990;39(10):1021–5.
42. Davidson LE, Hudson R, Kilpatrick K, et al. Effects of exercise mo-
dality on insulin resistance and functional limitation in older adults: a
randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(2):122–31.
43. Shirvani H, Arabzadeh E. Metabolic cross-talk between skeletal mus-
cle and adipose tissue in high-intensity interval training vs. moderate-
intensity continuous training by regulation of PGC-1α.Eat Weight
Disord. 2018; [Epub ahead of print]. doi:10.1007/s40519-018-0491-4.
44. Talanian JL, Galloway SDR, Heigenhauser GJF, Bonen A, Spriet
LL. Two weeks of high-intensity aerobic interval training increases
the capacity for fat oxidation during exercise in women. J Appl Phys-
iol. 2007;102(4):1439–47.
45. Sabag A, Najafi A, Michael S, Esgin T, Halaki M, Hackett D. The
compatibility of concurrent high intensity interval training and re-
sistance training for muscular strength and hypertrophy: a system-
atic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci. 2018;36(21):2472–83.
46. Martins FM, de Paula Souza A, Nunes PRP, et al. High-intensity
body weight training is comparable to combined training in changes
in muscle mass, physical performance, inflammatory markers and
metabolic health in postmenopausal women at high risk for type 2 di-
abetes mellitus: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Exp Gerontol.
2018;107:108–15.
47. Nunes PRP, Martins FM, Souza AP, et al. Effect of high-intensity
interval training on body composition and inflammatory markers
in obese postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial.
Menopause. 2019;26(3):256–64.
http://www.acsm-msse.org10 Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
AUTHOR QUERIES
AUTHOR PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUERIES
AQ1 = Please check if authors name are correctly captured for given names (in red) and sur-
names (in blue) for indexing after publication.
AQ2 = Figures 1 to 3 are poor quality. Please provide better quality of the images.
AQ3 = Please confirm if this should be “HIIT + RT”.
END OF AUTHOR QUERIES
Copyright © 2019 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
