Physical Fitness Responses after Sixteen Weeks of Three Fitness Program Trainings in Untrained Subjects.

The remarkable popularity of fitness trends like high intensity functional training (HIFT), choreographed high intensity classes (CHIC) and resistance (RT) trainings raises the question on their effect on cardio-respiratory, lactate removal rate, endurance and body composition responses. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare these effects. Ninety-five participants were randomly assigned into 16 weeks of these trainings, five sessions/week. Anthropometric and fitness tests were carried out before training (PRE), after eight (8W) and sixteen weeks (16W). Body composition measures demonstrated significant decrease in body fat percentage (p<0.001, d=0.17-0.54) for all groups and fat mass (p< 0.001, d= 0.26-0.53) for HIFT and CHIC in 8W,16W and in 16W for RT (p= 0.03, d= 0.14), also significant increase in fat free mass only in HIFT (p< 0.002, d= 0.06-0.21) and RT (p< 0.001, d= 0.17-0.33) in 8W,16W. Cardio-respiratory measures demonstrated significant improvements in maximal aerobic capacity for HIFT (p< 0.001, d= 0.58-1.26) and CHIC (p< 0.001, d= 0.45-1.21) in 8W,16W. Endurance tests demonstrated significant improvements in 8W,16W in aerobic endurance among HIFT (p< 0.001, d= 1.28-3.19) and CHIC (p< 0.001, d= 1.16-1.79), in muscle absolute endurance in three groups (p< 0.002, d= 0.14-1.17)and muscle relative endurance in HIFT (p< 0.02, d= 0.13-0.2)and RT (p= 0.03, d= 0.3) in 16W. We can conclude that HIFT and CHIC are effective for cardio-respiratory and endurance improvement and all three programs are effective in reducing body fat.

Effect of three fitness programs on strength, speed, flexibility and muscle power on sedentary subjects.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to research and compare the effect of Crossfit® (CF), LesMills® (LM) and traditional resistance (TRAD) training program on short performances. METHODS: Participants were assigned randomly into three groups and followed the training sessions allocated at the rate of five sessions/week for 16 weeks. A battery of tests including anthropometric and performance measures were carried out over three sessions: before training (T0), after eight weeks (T1) and sixteen weeks of training (T2). RESULTS: Findings indicated that strength tests demonstrated a significant time effect (P<0.001, ηp2=0.6), the results showed that CF and TRAD groups improved strength every 8 weeks while LM group only at T2, The speed test demonstrated also a significant time effect (P<0.001, ηp2=0.5) the results showed an improvement in speed every 8 weeks for LM, at T2 for CF and no change for TRAD, for flexibility, all tests demonstrated a main time effect (P<0.001, ηp2. 0.46-0.7) CF was the best in shoulder range of motion and LM in trunk and lower limb flexibility, all power tests also demonstrated a significant time effect (P<0.001, ηp2: 0.76-0.9) the improvement for all groups was every 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings, we recommend TRAD and CF as valuable trainings for strength development, LM for flexibility and all three trainings for power improvement.