Untitled

Abstract

Mat pilates programs on land have become a very safe and popular mode of exercise for all populations. Its adaptation in the water has been a more recent advance. Relevant literature, examining the benefits of both exercise programs are scarce. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the differences that may emerge from participating in the two types of Pilates (Land and Aqua), regarding physical fitness parameters body composition and dietary lipid composition. Forty women, with a mean age of 23.63 ± 2.71, voluntarily participated in the study. Twenty of the participants had been following Land Pilates (Land) sessions for two years, twice a week, and the other twenty participants had followed Aqua Pilates (Aqua) sessions for two years, twice a week. The Eurofit fitness evaluation tests were applied to measure handgrip strength, muscle endurance, balance, and percent body fat. Aerobic capacity, was measured submaximally on a cycle ergometer using the Austrand-Rhyming test, and by extrapolation on the Austrand-Rhyming nomogram, their VO2 max values were determined. Total cholesterol, was measured via the finger tip method by an instantly analyzed (Roche analyzer). The results revealed differences in body composition, flexibility and endurance of the abdominal muscles, while no differences occurred in total cholesterol, balance, handgrip strength and maximal oxygen uptake. In conclusion, both types of Pilates equally improved aerobic capacity, strength, muscle endurance and balance, with a similar benefit on blood cholesterol, while Land Piates had a better impact on percent body fat and flexibility. It is possible that the lack of gravitational forces of Aqua Pilates, may depress energy expenditure and the forces necessary to improve flexibility. Future more controlled experimental research needs to further investigate the different outcomes between Aqua and Land Pilates.

Pilates Method Improves Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Study and intervention characteristics are summarised in Table 2. Of the 10 included studies, five were RCTs [22,29,33,35,45], two were non-RCTs [31,44] and three were pre-post studies [30,32,46]. All the studies were conducted between 2008 and 2019 and included a total of 332 participants, of which 223 were in Pilates groups (67%) and 109 in control groups (33%).…”

“…All the studies were conducted between 2008 and 2019 and included a total of 332 participants, of which 223 were in Pilates groups (67%) and 109 in control groups (33%). The age of the participants ranged between 18 and 66 years; four studies were conducted in women only [22,31,32,46]. Furthermore, seven studies were conducted in a healthy population, including people described in the primary studies as people without health disorders or specific pathologies [22,31] (four in sedentary individuals [30,32,44,46] and one in trained runners [33]) and three studies were conducted in populations with specific health disorders, including those described in the primary studies as suffering some diseases or specific health disorders such as heart failure [35], chronic stroke [29] and overweight/obesity [45].…”

“…The mean attendance at the Pilates sessions was 88.2% (80%–100%). Among the 10 studies, six described the Pilates intervention as Pilates mat [22,29,30,33,35,46], three studies combined both modalities (mat and machine) [32,44,45] and one did not report the Pilates modality [31]. Moreover, six studies were conducted by a certified instructor [22,29,30,33,35,45] or with a detailed exercise protocol [29,30,32,34,44,45].…”

“…The outcome, VO 2 max, was directly measured in nine studies (two with a cycloergometer and seven with a treadmill) [29,30,31,32,33,35,45,46,47] and one study [22] used an algorithm based on heart rate to estimate VO 2 max values. The studies assessed participants at the end of the Pilates intervention, an no study measured VO 2 max during the Pilates session.…”

“…Although some studies [22,35,45,46] have failed to show significant changes in CRF after Pilates intervention, no study has reported negative effects of Pilates on the CRF levels, and therefore the positive clinical implications should not be underestimated. Additionally, more significant benefits of Pilates on CRF were achieved when other activities, such as running, were included [33] and this could be explained through a synergistic relationship between these training methods.…”