Research article - (2022)21, 347 - 355
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52082/jssm.2022.347
The Effects of Standardised versus Individualised Aerobic Exercise Prescription on Fitness-Fatness Index in Sedentary Adults: A Randomised Controlled Trial
Michael J. Kirton1, Mitchel T. Burnley1, Joyce S. Ramos1, Ryan Weatherwax2, Lance C. Dalleck3,
1Caring Futures Institute, SHAPE Research Centre, Clinical Exercise Physiology, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
2University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States of America
3Western Colorado University, Gunnison, Colorado, United States of America

Lance C. Dalleck
✉ Department of Recreation, Exercise, and Sport Science at Western Colorado University
Email: ldalleck@western.edu
Received: 26-03-2022 -- Accepted: 10-06-2022
Published (online): 01-09-2022

ABSTRACT

A poor Fitness Fatness Index (FFI) is associated with type 2 diabetes incidence, other chronic conditions (Alzheimer’s, cancer, and cardiovascular disease) and all-cause mortality. Recent investigations have proposed that an individualised exercise prescription based on ventilatory thresholds is more effective than a standardised prescription in improving cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), a key mediator of FFI. Thus, the aim of the current study was to determine the effectiveness of individualised versus standardised exercise prescription on FFI in sedentary adults. Thirty-eight sedentary individuals were randomised to 12-weeks of: (1) individualised exercise training using ventilatory thresholds (n = 19) or (2) standardised exercise training using a percentage of heart rate reserve (n = 19). A convenience sample was also recruited as a control group (n=8). Participants completed CRF exercise training three days per week, for 12-weeks on a motorised treadmill. FFI was calculated as CRF in metabolic equivalents (METs), divided by fatness determined by waist to height ratio (WtHR). A graded exercise test was used to measure CRF, and anthropometric measures (height and waist circumference) were assessed to ascertain WtHR. There was a difference in FFI change between study groups, whilst controlling for baseline FFI, F (2, 42) = 19.382 p < .001, partial η2 = 0.480. The magnitude of FFI increase from baseline was significantly higher in the individualised (+15%) compared to the standardised (+10%) (p = 0.028) and control group (+4%) (p = <.001). The main finding of the present study is that individualised exercise prescription had the greatest effect on improving FFI in sedentary adults compared to a standardised prescription. Therefore, an individualised based exercise prescription should be considered a viable and practical method of improving FFI in sedentary adults.

Key words: Ventilatory threshold, HRR, epidemiology, central obesity, physical activity

Key Points
  • Cardiorespiratory exercise prescribed individually using ventilatory thresholds had a greater effect on improving Fitness-Fatness Index in sedentary adults compared to a comparable protocol using heart rate reserve.
  • Individualized exercise prescription using threshold metrics should be considered a viable method for improving the Fitness-Fatness Index to help aid in mitigating the future progression of non-communicable disease.
  • Greater improvements in the Fitness-Fatness Index were supported by positive improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness








Back
|
Full Text
|
PDF
|
Share