The feasibility and effectiveness of high-intensity boxing training versus moderate-intensity brisk walking in adults with abdominal obesity: a pilot study

Abstract

BackgroundHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) performed on exercise cycle or treadmill is considered safe and often more beneficial for fat loss and cardiometabolic health than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). The aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of a 12-week boxing training (HIIT) intervention compared with an equivalent dose of brisk walking (MICT) in obese adults.MethodsMen and women with abdominal obesity and body mass index >25 kg/m2 were randomized to either a boxing group or a brisk walking (control) group for 12 weeks. Each group engaged in 4 training sessions per week, equated for total physical activity. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rates, assessment of training intensities, adherence and adverse events. Effectiveness was assessed pre and post intervention via pertinent obesity-, cardiovascular-, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes.ResultsNineteen individuals expressed an interest and 63% (n = 12) consented. Recruitment was slower than anticipated (1.3 participants/week). The boxing group trained at a significantly higher intensity each week versus the brisk walking group (p < 0.05). Two participants in the boxing group experienced an adverse event; both continued to exercise with modifications to the exercise program. No other adverse events were noted. The boxing group attended more sessions (79% vs. 55%) and had a lower attrition rate (n = 0 vs. n = 2) than the walking group. Analysis of covariance revealed that the boxing group significantly improved body fat percentage (p = 0.047), systolic blood pressure (p = 0.026), augmentation index (AIx; p < 0.001), absolute VO2max (p = 0.015), and Physical Functioning (p = 0.042) and Vitality (p = 0.024) domains of HRQoL over time. The walking group did not improve any clinical outcomes, and experienced a worsening of Vitality (p = 0.043).ConclusionsBoxing training (HIIT) in adults with abdominal obesity is feasible and may elicit a better therapeutic effect on obesity, cardiovascular, and HRQoL outcomes than an equivalent dose of brisk walking (MICT). Robustly designed randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings and inform clinical guidelines and practice for obesity treatment.Trial registrationTrial registration: ACTRN12615000007538

Is interval training the magic bullet for fat loss? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing moderate-intensity continuous training with high-intensity interval training (HIIT)

“…Only one study71 employed both HIIT and SIT interventions, and one study included two HIIT interventions 86. Of the 41 studies, 20 used cycling,24 55 57 58 69 70 72 73 75 78–81 83 84 87–90 93 16 used walking/jogging/running,54 56 59–67 71 77 82 91 92 1 used a synchronous arm and leg air-braked ergometer,85 1 offered a choice between the two (cycle ergometer or walking/running) depending on orthopaedic limitations,86 1 used swimming,74 1 used boxing drills for the HIIT protocol and walking for MOD,76 and 1 used a rower ergometer 68. Intervention duration ranged from 468 73 75 81 to 16 weeks,86 87 with 12 weeks being the most common (~44%; n=18)54 56 57 59 63 64 66 67 70 71 76 80 82–84 89 92 93 (online supplementary table S1).…”

“…The intensity of effort for HIIT protocols was prescribed by the percentage of i $true0\dot{V}$ O 2 max66 67 77 or i $true0\dot{V}$ O 2 peak,58 percentage of $true0\dot{V}$ O 2 max55 63 73 or $true0\dot{V}$ O 2 peak,70 percentage of HRmax54 56 59 71 78 87 90 92 93 or peak heart rate (HRpeak),64 65 81 82 85 86 rating of perceived exertion,76 HR corresponding to 20% above the HR at ventilatory threshold,57 and 90% of 4 min maximal power 68. The intensity of effort in most SIT protocols (n=13) was prescribed by ‘all-out’ efforts,24 60–62 69 71 72 74 83 84 88 89 91 percentage of i $true0\dot{V}$ O 2 peak,80 percentage of maximal power output75 and percentage of anaerobic power 79…”

Study protocol of a single-arm pre-post study to assess the preliminary effectiveness and feasibility of a home-based bimodal prehabilitation program on preoperative aerobic fitness in high-risk patients scheduled for liver or pancreatic resection

“…Consistent with previous studies examining the feasibility of novel exercise activities for a variety of at-risk populations, feasibility of the home-based bimodal prehabilitation program will be determined by participation rate and reasons for non-participation, the registration of the number and severity of adverse events, adherence to the program, and drop-out rate and reasons for drop-out. [33][34][35] Adverse events will be recorded by the community physical therapist. Data concerning training intensity and duration from each interval and endurance training session will be displayed at the cycle ergometer following a training session, and recorded by the physical therapist or by the patient in case of an unsupervised training session.…”

The use of adapted boxing as a rehabilitation strategy in people with diverse health conditions: a systematic review

“…Kafri et al(2014) carried out an additional comparison between sports AVGs and walking at a comfortable pace. Finally, one study compared virtual boxing with real heavy bag training (Mat Rosly et al, 2017 Regarding training loads, five studies reported on exercise intensity (Cheema et al, 2015;Gaffurini et al, 2013;Hurkmans et al, 2011Hurkmans et al, , 2010Mat Rosly et al, 2017) and four on training progress and the criteria used to plan the sessions (Abdulsatar et al, 2013;Combs et al, 2011;Mat Rosly et al, 2017;Park et al, 2017). Seven studies provided information about the location in which boxing et al, Combs et al, 2011;Hurkmans et al, 2011Hurkmans et al, , 2010Mat Rosly et al, 2017;Park et al, 2017).…”