Coronavirus is part of a group of viruses responsible for seasonally causing acute respiratory syndromes that can be accompanied from mild symptoms to severe conditions with a significant mortality rate. In addition to hygiene care, social distance is one of the most efficient strategies to mitigate the spread of the virus and reduce impacts on the world. Therefore, government strategies have directed efforts to ensure the isolation at home of much of the world’s population. One of the strategies that has been considered an important tool to facilitate adherence to isolation is the encouragement of regular physical exercise, especially due to its ability to reduce feelings of anxiety and stress in the population. Thus, in parallel with the expansion of coronavirus in the world, the search for exercise at home has gained prominence on the internet, demonstrating the emerging need to think of strategies that can lead to an effective home practice in promoting adherence to a physically active lifestyle. On the other hand, some pertinent questions may arise, such as: how will the exercise prescription and follow-up of the population be carried out during this period? What guidelines should be followed for a safe and efficient prescription? What types of exercises should be prioritized? What are the criteria for this selection? Based on these questions, this study aimed to present a proposal, integrating the physiological and psychobiological aspects, of how physical exercise could be prescribed at home, considering the barriers faced by the population in the face of social isolation worldwide. In summary, here we suggest a prescription model that estimates the weekly performance of at least 150 minutes of aerobic exercises, as well as strength exercises for the main muscle groups. In addition, we guide the use of tools that allow the assessment of physical effort and personal satisfaction in training, with the aim of improving adherence and maintenance to a physical exercise program and thus contributing to health promotion during the COVID-19 pandemic.Palavras-chave: exercice prescription, home training, lifestyle, pandemic Covid-19

Background: Mental health burden has been massively reported during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Aiming to summarise these data, we present a meta-review of meta-analyses that evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on anxiety, depressive and stress symptoms, psychological distress, post-traumatic stress disorder/symptoms (PTSD), and sleep disturbance, reporting its prevalence on general public (GP) and health care workers (HCW).Methods: A search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science. Sleep disturbances, psychological distress, stress, and burnout were grouped as “Psychophysiological stress,” and anxiety, depression, and PTSD were grouped as “Psychopathology.” A random-effects model, calculating the pooled prevalence together with 95% confidence interval was performed for each domain. Subgroup analyses were performed for each population type (GP and HCW) and for each mental health outcome. For anxiety and depression, subgroup analysis for population type was performed. Heterogeneity is reported as I2. Publication bias was assessed through visual inspection of the funnel plot, and further tested by Egger's test and trim and fill analyses.Results: A total of 18 meta-analyses were included. The prevalence of psychophysiological stress was 31.99% (CI: 26.88–37.58, I2 = 99.9%). HCW showed a higher prevalence (37.74%, CI: 33.26–42.45, I2 = 99.7%) than the GP (20.67%, 15.07–27.66, I2 = 99.9%). The overall prevalence of insomnia, psychological distress, and stress were, respectively, 32.34% (CI: 25.65–39.84), 28.25% (CI: 18.12–41.20), and 36% (CI: 29.31–43.54). Psychopathology was present at 26.45% (CI: 24.22–28.79, I2 = 99.9%) of the sample, with similar estimates for population (HCW 26.14%, CI: 23.37–29.12, I2 = 99.9%; GP: 26.99%, CI: 23.41–30.9, I2 = 99.9%). The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD was 27.77% (CI: 24.47–31.32), 26.93% (CI: 23.92–30.17), and 20% (CI: 15.54–24.37), respectively. Similar proportions between populations were found for anxiety (HCW = 27.5%, CI: 23.78–31.55; GP = 28.33%, CI: 22.1–35.5) and depression (HCW = 27.05%, CI: 23.14–31.36; GP = 26.7%, CI: 22.32–31.59). Asymmetry in the funnel plot was found, and a slight increase in the estimate of overall psychopathology (29.08%, CI: 26.42–31.89) was found after the trim and fill analysis.Conclusions: The prevalence of mental health problems ranged from 20 to 36%. HCW presented a higher prevalence of psychophysiological stress than the general population.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=252221, identifier: CRD42021252221.

No abstract

Affective responses and enjoyment of exercise mediate exercise adherence, but previous research findings have failed to examine nuances that may moderate this relationship. We examined the effects of exercise on affective and enjoyment responses during and post exercise through a systematic literature review and meta-regression analysis. We searched major databases up to July 9, 2020 for studies evaluating healthy adults’ acute and chronic responses to exercise, using either of The Feeling Scale or Physical Activity Enjoyment Scales. We calculated effect size (ES) values of 20 unique studies (397 participants; 40% females) as standardized differences in the means and expressed them as Hedges’ g, together with the 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Among acute studies examining affective responses, we found a greater positive effect post exercise for continuous training (CT) compared to high intensity interval training (HIIT) ( g = −0.61; 95%CI = −1.11, −0.10; p < .018), but there was no significant difference between these modes for effects during exercise. Subgroup analyses revealed that moderate, and not high intensity, CT, compared to HIIT, resulted in significantly greater positive affective responses ( g = −1.09; 95%CI = −1.88, −0.30; p < .006). In contrast, enjoyment was greater for HIIT, compared to CT ( g = 0.75; 95%CI = 0.17, −1.13; p = .010), but CT intensity did not influence this result. Among chronic studies, there was greater enjoyment following HIIT compared to CT, but these studies were too few to permit meta-analysis. We concluded that an acute bout of moderate intensity CT is more pleasurable, when measured post exercise than HIIT, but enjoyment is greater following HIIT, perhaps due to an interaction between effort, discomfort, time efficiency and constantly changing stimuli.

While drug use has been shown to impair cardiac autonomic regulation, exercise might overcome some of the damage. Herein, we describe how individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) have their heart rate variability (HRV) and drug-related behaviors negatively affected in response to a stressor. However, we show how cardiorespiratory fitness may attenuate those impairments in autonomic control. Fifteen individuals with SUD were matched with 15 non-SUD individuals by age, weight, height, and fitness level, and had their HRV responses under stress induced by the Cold Pressor Test (CPT). The SUD group had lower mean of R-R intervals before and after the CPT when compared with the non-SUD group. In addition, in individuals with SUD, higher cardiorespiratory fitness level predicted greater vagal activity before, during, and after CPT. Moreover, for individuals with SUD, days of abstinence predicted greater mean of R-R intervals during recovery from the CPT. Finally, years of drug use negatively predicted mean of R-R intervals during recovery. Thus, our results suggest that chronic drug use impairs cardiac autonomic regulation at rest and after a physical stress. However, cardiorespiratory fitness might attenuate these impairments by increasing vagal autonomic activity.

No abstract

Background Several tests are available to assess the different components of physical fitness, including cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength, and flexibility. However, the reliability and validity of physical fitness tests in people with mental disorders has not been meta‐analyzed. Aims To examine the reliability, concurrent, and convergent validity of physical fitness tests in people with mental disorders. Methods Studies evaluating the reliability, concurrent, and convergent validity of physical fitness tests in people with mental disorders were searched from major databases until January 20, 2020. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were performed pooling (1) reliability: test–retest correlations at two‐time points, (2) convergent validity between submaximal tests and maximal protocols, or (3) concurrent validity between two submaximal tests. Associations are presented using r values and 95% confidence intervals. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies and the Critical Appraisal Tool. Results A total of 11 studies (N = 504; 34% females) were included. Reliability of the fitness tests, produced r values ranging from moderate (balance test‐EUROFIT; [r = 0.75 (0.60–0.85); p = 0.0001]) to very strong (explosive leg power EUROFIT; [r = 0.96 (0.93–0.97); p = 0.0001]). Convergent validity between the 6‐min walk test (6MWT) and submaximal cardiorespiratory tests was moderate (0.57 [0.26–0.77]; p = 0.0001). Concurrent validity between the 2‐min walk test and 6MWT (r = 0.86 [0.39–0.97]; p = 0.0004) was strong. Conclusion The present study demonstrates that physical fitness tests are reliable and valid in people with mental disorders.

Tavares, VDdO, Agrícola, PMD, Nascimento, PHD, Oliveira Neto, L, Elsangedy, HM, and Machado, DGS. The effect of resistance exercise movement tempo on psychophysiological responses in novice men. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1264–1273, 2020—This study aimed to compare the effects of movement tempo in resistance exercise (RE) on psychophysiological responses in novice men. Seventeen novice men (24.5 ± 3.2 years; 79.3 ± 8.22 kg; 1.76 ± 0.06 m) performed the 10 repetition maximum (10RM) test for bench press and knee extension in 2 sessions (test-retest) and 2 RE training sessions with different movement tempos in a random and counterbalanced order (4 sets of 10 repetitions). The low tempo RE (LTRE) session was performed using 50% 10RM with 3-0-3-0 seconds (concentric, pause, eccentric, and pause, respectively). The moderate tempo RE (MTRE) session was performed using 80% 10RM with 1-0-1-0 seconds (concentric, pause, eccentric, and pause, respectively). Affective valence (Feeling Scale), perceived activation (FAS), attentional focus, and ratings of perceived exertion (Borg 6–20) were reported after each set. A two-way analysis of variance with repeated measures showed only a significant main effect of the set (all ps < 0.05), indicating changes between sets but not between LTRE and MTRE. In addition, a paired-samples t-test did not find significant differences between LTRE and MTRE, on average, in any psychophysiological responses (all ps > 0.16). Thus, for the protocol tested, there is no psychophysiological advantage to using either LTRE or MTRE in novice men. From a practical perspective, for psychophysiological responses, the present results suggest that it is up to the trainer/coach to decide which RE movement tempo to use, which will depend on the purpose of the training period, specificity, client tolerance of and preference for exercise intensity, and movement tempo.