4.1 Article

Women pole dance athletes present morphofunctional left ventricular adaptations and greater physical fitness

Journal

SCIENCE & SPORTS
Volume 37, Issue 7, Pages 595-602

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scispo.2022.02.002

Keywords

Cardiovascu; lar/cardiorespiratory; Dancing; Exercise; Fitness; Training

Categories

Funding

  1. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPq [306385/2020-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that pole dance athletes have higher physical fitness but no significant changes in heart rate variability markers. Additionally, pole dance athletes showed left ventricle remodeling with improved LV relaxation.
Objectives. - This cross-section study evaluated physical fitness, heart rate variability (HRV) and, left ventricle (LV) morphology and function in pole dance (PD) athletes. Equipment and methods. - Control group (CG) was composed of 16 untrained women and the PD group (PG) was composed of 15 professional women. Physical fitness, echocardiographic, HRV and parameters were assessed. Results. - A better physical performance was found in the PG compared to CG group, with significant differences for tests: handgrip strength test -left hand (P < 0.05) and right hand (P < 0.01), push-up (P < 0.001), curl-up (P < 0.001), and sit and reach (P < 0.001). Systolic function of LV did not differ statistically between CG and PG. The LV relative wall thickness was significantly high (P < 0.05, mean difference: 0.04) and the isovolumic relaxation time was significantly lower (P < 0.01, mean difference: -27 ms) in the PG. The HRV indices did not differ statistically between the groups. Conclusion. - The PD athletes have higher physical fitness without changes in HRV makers. Moreover, PD athletes had LV remodeling with an improved LV relaxation. (c) 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available