Download
1 / 20
200 likes | 304 Views
This presentation addresses the growing interest in short-bout exercise as a viable alternative to traditional long workouts for adults with no history of coronary artery disease. We explore reasons for patient resistance to exercise, the benefits of segmented workouts, and their effectiveness in reducing CAD risk factors. With insights from existing studies, we evaluate adherence rates, weight loss, and overall fitness outcomes associated with shorter sessions. Limitations of current literature are discussed alongside suggestions for future research to optimize exercise guidelines for varied populations.
E N D
Do the Splits:Can Patients Divide the Daily Workout? Taryn Smith, PAS-3 Faculty Mentor: Daniel O’Donoghue, PA-C, PhD OU Health Science Center Oklahoma City, OK
Why Address Exercise? • Pts resistant to providers’ advice on matter • Too little time • Feel inadequate or fear injury • Vague idea of benefits • Lack of motivation
Clinical Question In adults with no history of coronary artery disease (CAD), is a summative 30 minutes of daily aerobic activity as effective at minimizing risk factors for CAD as a consecutive 30 minutes of daily aerobic activity?
Objectives • Consider why patients may desire an alternative to “traditional” exercise • Define what constitutes a short-bout workout • Evaluate the tangible benefits linked to short-bout workouts • Examine the validity of the findings • Consider literature limitations and avenues of future research
The Recommendation 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans ≥ 150 minutes/week Moderate intensity
Define Short-Bout Exercise • Anything less than the traditional 30+ minutes • 10, 15, 20, 30 minutes
The Payoff: SB vs. LB • Increased workout adherence • Equivalent weight loss • Similar VO2max increases • Equal reduction of body fat % • Decreased waist circumference • Lowered BMI in > 25 cohort • Decreased skinfold thickness
Trusting the Science • Designs of studies • p values • Varied subgroups within cohort
Literature Limitations • Small sample sizes • Self-reported data • Confounding interventions • Short study duration • Decreased exercise over time • Older data
Future Research Improvements • Larger sample sizes • Different cohorts • Longer study length • Improved endpoints • Eliminate confounders
References • 2008 Physical activity guidelines for Americans. US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Washington: HHS; 2008. (Accessed March 14, 2012, at http://www.health.gov/paguidelines/pdf/paguide.pdf). • Murphy MH, Hardman AE (1998) Training effects of short and long bouts of brisk walking in sedentary women, Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., 30: 152–15. • Schmidt WD, Biwer CJ, Kalscheuer LK (2001) Effects of long versus short bout exercise on fitness and weight loss in overweight females, J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 20(5): 494-501. • Jakicic JM, Wing RR, Butler BA, Robertson RJ (1995) Prescribing exercise in multiple short bouts versus one continuous bout: effects on adherence, cardiorespiratory fitness, and weight loss in overweight women, International Journal of Obesity, 19: 893-901. • Jakicic JM, Winters C, Lang W, Wing RR (1999) Effects of intermittent exercise and use of home exercise equipment on adherence, weight loss, and fitness in overweight women: a randomized trial, JAMA, 282(16): 1554-1560.
References • Deaths and Mortality. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Atlanta, GA; March 2012. (Accessed 9/24/12 at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.html). • Physical Activity and Health: The Benefits of Physical Activity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Atlanta, GA; February 2011. Accessed 9/24/12 at http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/everyone/health/index.html). • Physical Activity: Measuring Physical Activity Intensity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA. December 2011. Accessed 9/24/12 at http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/everyone/measuring/index.html).
