anthropometri c measurements weight height waist and hip maximal oxygen uptake

Anthropometri c measurements weight height waist and

This preview shows page 10 - 12 out of 24 pages.

-anthropometric measurements( weight, height, waist and hip)- maximal oxygen uptake (V02max)-Resting metabolic rate (RMR)-nonexercise PA levels- Fasting and Postprandial Levels of Glucose andInsulin.-Diet monitoring- anthropometric variables overtime were notsignificant different between exercise groups. There was a significant overall reduction in body weight(p < .01), waist (p < .001) and hip (p < .01).Fat mas was significantly reduced overtime (p < .01),while trunk fat free mass increased significantly (p < .01) withexercise. However, no significant maineffect of groupor interactions wasfound.-no significant effect on resting metabolic rate and substrate oxygen -no significant effect on physical activity levels - There was a tendency fora reduction in AUC for insulin over time (p = .069) butno effect-no significant effect on diet-- Statistical Package for Socal Sciences (SPSS)-ANOVA isocaloric training protocols of HIITor MICT, or short duration HIIT (1/2 HIIT) seem tooffer a similar metabolic and cardiovascular protectionit sedentary obese individuals.This study agreed by Boutcher (2011), Tjonnaet al, (2008) and Schjerve etal, 2008). Multimodal high-intensity interval training increases musclefunction and metabolic performance in What is the thephysiologicalbenefits of an MM-HIIT program compared withHIIT using aThirty-two recreationally active women between the ages of18 and 35Treadmill usedfor measuring the V02max test protocol -cycling used or Wingate -V02max test; speed was progressed by 1 km × h−1 everyminute and thegrade was held-anthropometric measurements (size, weight)MM-HIIT and Row-HIIT resulted in similarimprovements (p <0.05 for post hoc pre- vs. post-training increases -ANOVA- mean± standard deviation (SD)M-HIIT protocol results inaerobic and anaerobic performanceadaptations This study agreed by many research and found the similar results.
Background image
femalesBuckley S et al, Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab, 2015more traditional aerobic modality (rowing).anaerobic test -deadlift, squatand press for muscle strength testconstant at 1% until participantsreached their sustainable running speed.-Wingate anaerobic test;preceded by a practicedrop for 3 s at 0.03 kg × kg−1 body mass and a 1-min rest period. -MS; 1- maximum reputation (1RM)-maximal oxygen uptake (V02max)for each group) in maximal aerobic power (7% vs. 5%),anaerobic threshold (13% vs.12%), respiratory compensation threshold (7% vs. 5%), anaerobic power (15% vs. 12%), and anaerobiccapacity (18% vs. 14%). The MM-HIIT group had significant (p < 0.01 for all) increases in squat (39%), press (27%), and deadlift (18%)strength, broad jump distance (6%), and squat endurance (280%), whereas the Row-HIIT group had no increase in any muscleperformance variable (p values 0.33–0.90). Post-training, 1-repetition maximum (1RM) squat (64.2 } 13.6vs. 45.8 } 16.2 kg, p = 0.02),1RM press (33.2 }3.8 vs. 26.0 } 9.6 kg, p = 0.01), and squat endurance (23.9 } 12.3 vs.
Background image
Image of page 12

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 24 pages?

  • Winter '15
  • Dr. Webi
  • High-intensity interval training, HIIT, High intensity training

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture