28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The use of periodization in exercise prescriptions for inactive adults: A systematic review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Periodization of exercise is a method typically used in sports training, but the impact of periodized exercise on health outcomes in untrained adults is unclear.

          Purpose

          This review aims to summarize existing research wherein aerobic or resistance exercise was prescribed to inactive adults using a recognized periodization method.

          Methods

          A search of relevant databases, conducted between January and February of 2014, yielded 21 studies published between 2000 and 2013 that assessed the impact of periodized exercise on health outcomes in untrained participants.

          Results

          Substantial heterogeneity existed between studies, even under the same periodization method. Compared to baseline values or non-training control groups, prescribing periodized resistance or aerobic exercise yielded significant improvements in health outcomes related to traditional and emerging risk factors for cardiovascular disease, low-back and neck/shoulder pain, disease severity, and quality of life, with mixed results for increasing bone mineral density.

          Conclusions

          Although it is premature to conclude that periodized exercise is superior to non-periodized exercise for improving health outcomes, periodization appears to be a feasible means of prescribing exercise to inactive adults within an intervention setting. Further research is necessary to understand the effectiveness of periodizing aerobic exercise, the psychological effects of periodization, and the feasibility of implementing flexible non-linear methods.

          Related collections

          Most cited references82

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The pleasure and displeasure people feel when they exercise at different intensities: decennial update and progress towards a tripartite rationale for exercise intensity prescription.

          The public health problem of physical inactivity has proven resistant to research efforts aimed at elucidating its causes and interventions designed to alter its course. Thus, in most industrialized countries, the majority of the population is physically inactive or inadequately active. Most theoretical models of exercise behaviour assume that the decision to engage in exercise is based on cognitive factors (e.g. weighing pros and cons, appraising personal capabilities, evaluating sources of support). Another, still-under-appreciated, possibility is that these decisions are influenced by affective variables, such as whether previous exercise experiences were associated with pleasure or displeasure. This review examines 33 articles published from 1999 to 2009 on the relationship between exercise intensity and affective responses. Unlike 31 studies that were published until 1998 and were examined in a 1999 review, these more recent studies have provided evidence of a relation between the intensity of exercise and affective responses. Pleasure is reduced mainly above the ventilatory or lactate threshold or the onset of blood lactate accumulation. There are pleasant changes at sub-threshold intensities for most individuals, large inter-individual variability close to the ventilatory or lactate threshold and homogeneously negative changes at supra-threshold intensities. When the intensity is self-selected, rather than imposed, it appears to foster greater tolerance to higher intensity levels. The evidence of a dose-response relation between exercise intensity and affect sets the stage for a reconsideration of the rationale behind current guidelines for exercise intensity prescription. Besides effectiveness and safety, it is becoming increasingly clear that the guidelines should take into account whether a certain level of exercise intensity would be likely to cause increases or decreases in pleasure.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Physical activity in U.S.: adults compliance with the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans.

            To date, no study has objectively measured physical activity levels among U.S. adults according to the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (PAGA). The purpose of this study was to assess self-reported and objectively measured physical activity among U.S. adults according to the PAGA. Using data from the NHANES 2005-2006, the PAGA were assessed using three physical activity calculations: moderate plus vigorous physical activity ≥150 minutes/week (MVPA); moderate plus two instances of vigorous physical activity ≥150 minutes/week (M2VPA); and time spent above 3 METs ≥500 MET-minutes/week (METPA). Self-reported physical activity included leisure, transportation, and household activities. Objective activity was measured using Actigraph accelerometers that were worn for 7 consecutive days. Analyses were conducted in 2009-2010. U.S. adults reported 324.5 ± 18.6 minutes/week (M ± SE) of moderate physical activity and 73.6 ± 3.9 minutes/week of vigorous physical activity, although accelerometry estimates were 45.1 ± 4.6 minutes/week of moderate physical activity and 18.6 ± 6.6 minutes/week of vigorous physical activity. The proportion of adults meeting the PAGA according to M2VPA was 62.0% for self-report and 9.6% for accelerometry. According to the NHANES 2005-2006, fewer than 10% of U.S. adults met the PAGA according to accelerometry. However, physical activity estimates vary substantially depending on whether self-reported or measured via accelerometer. Copyright © 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Fundamentals of resistance training: progression and exercise prescription.

              Progression in resistance training is a dynamic process that requires an exercise prescription process, evaluation of training progress, and careful development of target goals. The process starts with the determination of individual needs and training goals. This involves decisions regarding questions as to what muscles must be trained, injury prevention sites, metabolic demands of target training goals, etc. The single workout must then be designed reflecting these targeted program goals including the choice of exercises, order of exercise, amount of rest used between sets and exercises, number of repetitions and sets used for each exercise, and the intensity of each exercise. For progression, these variables must then be varied over time and the exercise prescription altered to maintain or advance specific training goals and to avoid overtraining. A careful system of goal targeting, exercise testing, proper exercise technique, supervision, and optimal exercise prescription all contribute to the successful implementation of a resistance training program.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Prev Med Rep
                Prev Med Rep
                Preventive Medicine Reports
                Elsevier
                2211-3355
                06 May 2015
                2015
                06 May 2015
                : 2
                : 385-396
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Kinesiology, Recreation, and Sports Studies, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, United States
                [b ]Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States
                [c ]Department of Psychology, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID, United States
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: 1914 Andy Holt Ave., 322 HPER Bldg, Knoxville, TN 37996-2700, United States. Fax: + 1 865 974 8981. kstrohac@ 123456utk.edu
                Article
                S2211-3355(15)00060-1
                10.1016/j.pmedr.2015.04.023
                4721364
                26844095
                b6fcaac5-c8dc-4f43-ab90-75e6801703b6
                © 2015 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Review

                health,periodized exercise,sedentary,intervention,aerobic training,resistance training

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content285

                Cited by19

                Most referenced authors1,076