| Obesity and its related metabolic disease incidence have dramatically increased in thepresent, become important factors endangering people’s health and quality of life, and it isincreasingly recognized that the produced of these diseases correlate with distribution of fat.The accumulation of abdominal fat, especially abdominal visceral fat more reflect directly thedegree of obesity, and serious harm to the health.Traditional exercise to lose weight often used in low-intensity continuous exercisetraining. This exercise program can improve fat consumption, to improve the glucose andlipid levels, improve aerobic fitness and other health-related parameters. But at the same time,there is a long time, and the lack of movement rhythm monotonous. Therefore, most of thecrowd, especially difficult for obese people to adhere to.In recent years, more and more scholars studied the impact of the high-intensity intervaltraining (High Intensity Interval Training, HIIT) on people’s health. The results show that theHIIT have the safety and acceptability, but also because of its shorter exercise time, isrelatively easier to adhere to. In addition, The HIIT effect on improving aerobic capacity,improve insulin sensitivity, lower blood sugar, reduce fat, and improve endothelial functioncan be preliminarily confirmed. However, relatively few studies on the movement of HIITweight loss prescription human experimental research is also more common in study abroad.Although some studies of the HIIT on obesity, the effect of the training on Fat%and BMI islimited. The lack of the research that the impact of HIIT on abdominal fat especially visceralfat.Purpose: To compare the changes in abdominal visceral fat (VA) and subcutaneous fat(SA) areas in obese females resulting from a high intensity interval training (HIIT) programand that from a moderate-intensity aerobic continuous training (ACT) program withequivalent oxygen uptake.Methods:24obese women were evenly assigned into two groups to complete a12-week(4day/wk) exercise program. In HIIT group, subjects performed four4-min interval treadmillrunning at85-95%of peak heart rate (HRpeak) interspersed by3-min walking at50-60%of HRpeakand7-min rest. In ACT group, subjects participated in training consisted of continuousrun at60-70%of HRpeakfor33mins representing equivalent training volume as HIIT group.10-min warm-up and5-min cool down exercise at50-60%of HRpeakwere identical in the twogroups. All subjects maintained their normal diet habit during the entire experiment.Computed tomography scans obtained at the L4-L5disc-space were used to determine VAand SA area. Whole-body%fat was assessed by bioelectrical impedance.Results: Subjects’ characteristics of the two groups were similar pre-training.(1) Aftertraining, VA area reduction was only found in HIIT (64.86±17.46vs53.12±14.51cm2, p﹤0.01), but not in ACT (60.41±15.45vs55.55±14.94cm2, p﹥0.05) group.(2) Correspondingly,waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) significantly decreased by1.26%(p=0.039) in HIIT group aftertraining, but there was no statistically significant decrease (p=0.305) in ACT group.(3) HIITgroup exhibited higher reduction in SA area than ACT group (HIIT:255.29±77.38vs205.57±68.25cm2; ACT:229.44±57.36vs204.02±55.74cm2, p﹤0.01).(4) However, similarreductions in body weight (HIIT:66.37±9.34vs61.23±8.39kg; ACT:64.81±6.10vs60.28±5.78kg, p﹤0.01) and%body fat (HIIT:31.30±3.63vs28.18±3.93%; ACT:32.01±2.41vs29.21±2.43%, p﹤0.01) were observed in both groups.(5) Two trainingprograme significantly improved VO2maxby14%and14.5%respectively, and the changevalues had no significantly difference (p=0.828).Conclusions: The12-wk HIIT and ACT programs with equivalent oxygen uptakeresulted in similar reductions in%body fat in obese women. Nevertheless, HIIT reduced VAarea but not in ACT program, and the degree of SA area reduction by HIIT was greater thanACT. |
PDF Full Text Request