4.6 Article

Individual Response to Standardized Exercise: Total and Abdominal Adipose Tissue

Journal

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
Volume 52, Issue 2, Pages 490-497

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002140

Keywords

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ABDOMINAL OBESITY; INDIVIDUAL VARIABILITY; AEROBIC EXERCISE

Categories

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [OHN-63277]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose (1) Determine the effect of exercise amount and intensity on the proportion of individuals for whom the adipose tissue (AT) response is above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID); and (2) Examine whether clinically meaningful anthropometric changes reflect individual AT responses above the MCID. Methods Men (n = 41) and women (n = 62) (52.7 7.6 yr) were randomized to control (n = 20); low amount low intensity (n = 24); high amount low intensity (n = 30); and high amount high intensity (n = 29) treadmill exercise for 24 wk. The AT changes were measured by MRI. 90% confidence intervals for each individual's observed response were calculated as the observed score 1.64 x TE (technical error of measurement). Results For visceral AT, HAHI and HALI had a greater proportion of individuals whose AT change and 90% confidence interval were beyond the MCID compared to controls (P < 0.006). For all other AT depots, all exercise groups had significantly more individuals whose changes were beyond the MCID compared with controls. Of those who achieved a waist circumference or body weight reduction the MCID, 76% to 93% achieved abdominal, abdominal subcutaneous, and visceral AT changes >= the MCID. Conclusions Increasing exercise amount and/or intensity may increase the proportion of individuals who achieve clinically meaningful visceral AT reductions. Waist circumference or body weight changes beyond a clinically meaningful threshold are predictive of clinically meaningful abdominal adiposity changes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available