Content uploaded by Ricardo Borges Viana
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ricardo Borges Viana on Feb 28, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Submitted 19 July 2018
Accepted 29 October 2018
Published 28 February 2019
Corresponding authors
Claudio Andre B. de Lira,
andre.claudio@gmail.com
Marilia S. Andrade,
marilia1707@gmail.com
Academic editor
Antonio Palazón-Bru
Additional Information and
Declarations can be found on
page 20
DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022
Copyright
2019 Rayes et al.
Distributed under
Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0
OPEN ACCESS
The effects of Pilates vs. aerobic training
on cardiorespiratory fitness, isokinetic
muscular strength, body composition,
and functional tasks outcomes for
individuals who are overweight/obese:
a clinical trial
Angeles Bonal Rosell Rayes1, Claudio Andre B. de Lira2, Ricardo B. Viana2,
Ana A. Benedito-Silva3, Rodrigo L. Vancini4, Naryana Mascarin1and
Marilia S. Andrade1
1Departamento de Fisiologia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
2Faculdade de Educa¸
cão Física e Dan¸
ca, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil
3Escola de Artes, Ciências e Humanidades, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
4Centro de Educa¸
cão Física e Desportos, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Espírito Santo,
Brazil
ABSTRACT
Background. Some studies have been conducted to verify the effects of Pilates for indi-
viduals who are obese, but conclusive results are not yet available due to methodological
concerns. The present study aims to verify and compare the effects of Pilates and aerobic
training on cardiorespiratory fitness, isokinetic muscular strength, body composition,
and functional task outcomes for individuals who are overweight/obese.
Methods. Of the sixty participants, seventeen were allocated to the control group, since
the intervention protocol (Pilates or walking sessions) was during their working hours.
The remaining 44 participants were randomly allocated to one of two experimental
groups (Pilates (n=22)) or aerobic groups (n=21). The Pilates and aerobic groups
attended 60-min exercise sessions, three times per week for 8 weeks. The aerobic group
performed walking training at a heart rate corresponding to the ventilatory threshold.
The Pilates group performed exercises on the floor, resistance apparatus, and 1-kg
dumbbells. The control group received no intervention. All volunteers were evaluated at
the beginning and end of the intervention. The following assessments were conducted:
food intake, cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test, isokinetic strength testing, body
composition and anthropometry, abdominal endurance test, trunk extensor endurance
test, flexibility test and functional (stair and chair) tests.
Results. There was no significant difference pre- and post-intervention in calorie
intake [F(2,57) =0.02744, p=0.97)]. A significant improvement in oxygen uptake at
ventilatory threshold (p=0.001; d=0.60), respiratory compensation point (p=0.01;
d=0.48), and maximum effort (p=0.01; d=0.33) was observed only in the Pilates
group. Isokinetic peak torque for knee flexor and extensor muscles did not change
for any groups. Lean mass (p=0.0005; d=0.19) and fat mass (p=0.0001; d=0.19)
improved only in the Pilates group. Waist and hip circumference measurements de-
creased similarly in both experimental groups. Abdominal test performance improved
How to cite this article Rayes ABR, de Lira CAB, Viana RB, Benedito-Silva AA, Vancini RL, Mascarin N, Andrade MS. 2019. The effects
of Pilates vs. aerobic training on cardiorespiratory fitness, isokinetic muscular strength, body composition, and functional tasks outcomes for
individuals who are overweight/obese: a clinical trial. PeerJ 7:e6022 http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6022
more in the Pilates group (p=0.0001; d=1.69) than in the aerobic group (p=0.003;
d=0.95). Trunk extensor endurance and flexibility improved only in the Pilates group
(p=0.0003; d=0.80 and p=0.0001; d=0.41, respectively). The Pilates group showed
greater improvement on the chair and stair tests (p=0.0001; d=1.48 and p=0.003;
d=0.78, respectively) than the aerobic group (p=0.005; d=0.75 and p=0.05;
d=0.41, respectively).
Conclusion.Pilates can be used as an alternative physical training method for individu-
als who are overweight or obese since it promotes significant effects in cardiorespiratory
fitness, body composition, and performance on functional tests.
Subjects Clinical Trials, Kinesiology
Keywords Maximal oxygen uptake, Isokinetic dynamometer, Obesity, Pilates, Body composition,
Exercise
INTRODUCTION
Obesity constitutes an important threat to global public health in terms of prevalence,
incidence, and economic burden (Tremmel et al., 2017). According to the World Health
Organization (WHO), more than 1.9 billion adults aged 18 years and older are overweight
(World Health Organization, 2015); of these, over 650 million are obese, and this number is
growing exponentially worldwide (World Health Organization, 2015). The most common
cause of obesity identified in a recent review study was ‘‘combined physical inactivity and
inadequate diet’’ (Ross, Flynn & Pate, 2016). In spite of obesity being associated with an
increased risk of premature death (Xiao & Fu, 2015), in a recent review, Barry et al. (2014)
concluded that unfit individuals with lower cardiorespiratory levels had twice the risk of
mortality than fit individuals, regardless of body mass index (BMI). Although fatness is
associated with several chronic diseases, data suggest that the low cardiorespiratory levels
in obese people are worse for mortality risk than the fatness, (Barry et al., 2014), so physical
activity programs for obese people should aim to improve physical fitness in addition to
reducing total body mass.
There is no consensus in the literature as to whether physical activity is important
for total body mass loss and improved body composition (Pedersen & Saltin, 2015). The
amount of body mass loss associated with the introduction of physical activity probably is
not very high, considering the much lower degree of energy imbalance created by increased
physical activity than by food restriction (Wing, 1999). However, several studies showed
that physical training promotes a decrease in fat mass and in abdominal fatness, unlike diet
intervention, which, in a harmful side-effect of very restrictive calorie diets, also promotes
a fat-free mass loss (Ross & Janssen, 1999).
Moderate walking or jogging programs have traditionally been suggested to improve
variables related to health (Ross et al., 2000;Pedersen & Saltin, 2015), however, in a recent
review, Mabire et al. (2017) demonstrated that the effects of the walking training depend
on the sex, age and body mass index. For obese people it is also difficult to exercise with
weight bearing activities without supervision, because obesity is an important risk factor
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 2/26
involved in knee pain and initiation and progression of osteoarthritis (Santangelo et al.,
2016). Adherence levels to traditional aerobic programs are not very high, particularly if
they are monotone and potentially painful for obese individuals (Burgess et al., 2017).
Alternative exercises should therefore be considered, such as planning enjoyable activities
or amusing, non–weight-bearing exercises that consider the importance of improving
aerobic fitness, muscular condition, and body composition. One option is Pilates, which
is a body/mind training regime involving a variety of exercises for core stability, muscular
strength, flexibility, attention to muscle control, posture, and breathing (Penelope, 2002;
Aladro-Gonzalvo et al., 2012;Kü¸
cük¸
cakı, Altan & Korkmaz, 2013;de Oliveira Francisco, de
Almeida Fagundes & Gorges, 2015). Because of this variety, Pilates avoids monotony can
be performed in a seated, standing, or lying position, thus protecting the knee joints and
avoiding weight bearing. Pilates apparatus, such as the Reformer, are constructed in a
manner that can accommodate many human anatomic variations and can be adjusted such
that similar properties of movement sequencing can be applied to a variety of body types
and limb/torso lengths (Muscolino & Cipriani, 2004), which is of fundamental importance
for obese people.
Some studies have been conducted to verify the effects of Pilates for obese individuals
(Jago et al., 2006;Aladro-Gonzalvo et al., 2012), but, due to methodological concerns
(e.g., lack of control group, small sample size, lack of a complete methodological
description), conclusive results are not yet available. More high-quality studies assessing
different physical fitness parameters have been suggested to establish the effects of Pilates
(Aladro-Gonzalvo et al., 2012).
This study compares the effects of Pilates and traditional aerobic training (walking)
programs on body composition, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular performance (strength,
endurance, and flexibility), and functional tasks for overweight or obese subjects without
changes in diet. We hypothesized that Pilates results in similar benefits in cardiorespiratory
fitness and body composition and higher benefits in isokinetic muscular strength and
functional task outcomes compared to traditional aerobic training
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participants
Female and male adults ranging from 30 to 66 years of age who are overweight or obese
were invited to participate in the study. The medical school where the study was performed
included almost 5,500 staff members and 6,000 students, and the volunteers were drawn
from this community. Inclusion criteria were: present BMI higher than 25 kg/m2and be
classified as insufficiently active or sedentary according to International Physical Activity
Questionnaire (IPAQ) (Craig et al., 2003). Exclusion criteria were present neurological,
cognitive, orthopedic and respiratory disease. Subjects presenting cardiovascular or
endocrine disease which were not controlled were also excluded. In addition, subjects
who presented cardiovascular events during the exercise tests were also excluded. From
July 2013 until December 2014, 115 volunteers performed a medical exam taking into
account a medical history questionnaire and a medical physical exam. The follow-up
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 3/26
for the first group of participants began in September 2013 and the last group ended in
July 2015. Forty-six volunteers were excluded after the application of the inclusion and
the exclusion criteria; the reasons for exclusion were: presence of cardiovascular disease
(n=45) and presence of arrhythmia (n=1).
Of the 69 remaining participants, 25 were allocated to the control group, since the
intervention protocols (Pilates or walking sessions) occurred during their working hours.
The remaining 44 participants were randomly assigned by drawing their names written on
pieces of paper from an opaque envelope and placing them in one of two experimental
groups (Pilates or aerobic). During the entire intervention protocol, 9 volunteers dropped
out of participation. One participant from the aerobic group withdrew due to knee pain.
Eight participants from the control group did not attend the retest protocol; two of them
reported back pain, two had undergone emergency surgeries (appendix and fracture), and
four cited personal reasons. A flow diagram illustrating the study design and volunteer
participation is presented in Fig. 1.
Comorbidities were detected during the medical exam, through self-reporting, with
the following description: three participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Pilates group);
14 participants with hypertension (nine in the Pilates group, two in the aerobic group,
and three in the control group); 18 participants with dyslipidemia (10 in the Pilates
group, three in the aerobic group, and five in the control group), and 11 participants with
hypothyroidism (7 in the Pilates group, two in the aerobic group, and two in the control
group). All these presented comorbidities were under treatment and were controlled.
Subjects were informed of the study purpose and protocols, and all provided written
informed consent before taking part in the study. The Human Research Ethics Committee
of the University approved all experimental procedures (Approval number: 197.451) that
complied with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. This clinical trial
was registered with the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Essays (ReBEC, Registro Brasileiro
de Ensaios Clínicos—http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br) and its registration code is RBR-
7QNSH6. The authors confirm that all ongoing and related trials for this intervention
were duly registered. It is noteworthy that the target sample size described in the clinical
trial’s registration was 20 participants for each group. To ensure that 20 participants would
conclude the study, more than 20 subjects were initially recruited, and after withdrawals,
17 participants from the control group, 21 from the aerobic group and 22 from the Pilates
group participated through to the conclusion of the study.
The age of the participants who completed all phases of experimental protocol (n=60)
was 55.9 ±6.6yrs (Pilates group), 42.4 ±7.0yrs (aerobic group) and 45.5 ±9.3yrs (control
group). One-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) was used to verify differences in age
and height before intervention. The one way ANOVA revealed that Pilates group was
older than the other groups [F(2,57) =18.521,p<0.01]. The height was not significantly
different between Pilates (161 ±6 cm), Aerobic (161 ±8 cm) or Control groups (162 ±7)
[F(2,57) =0.25089, p=0.78].
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 4/26
Figure 1 Flowchart showing the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) of partici-
pants through the study.
Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6022/fig-1
Study design
This study was a variation of the classic RCT for experimental groups. According to West et
al. (2008), classical RCTs rely on the strong adherence of volunteers and, in some situations,
very intense encouragement is necessary to guarantee the adherence, creating an unreal
situation. In an alternative to this model, volunteers are allowed to choose the treatment
they want to receive, rather than being randomly allocated in a group. This option is
very interesting situations in which it is impractical or unrealistic to require adherence,
and in which the adherence would only be possible through unrealistic encouragement.
Considering that some participants could not participate in interventions due to their
work activities, we decided to use a randomized encouragement design, since it would be
unethical and unrealistic to request the volunteer to resign. Professionals who carried out
the tests and measurements were blinded to the treatment conditions.
Since previous studies investigating aerobic training effects had found positive results
with eight weeks of training (Ho et al., 2012;Many et al., 2013), participants in the aerobic
and Pilates groups followed an experimental protocol for a period of eight weeks, with
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 5/26
60-minute sessions three times per week (totaling 24 sessions). Participants were asked not
to initiate any other exercise activity apart from the one included in this study. When a
participant missed three or fewer training sessions, the sessions were replaced at the end of
the period, but if more than three sessions were missed, the participant was excluded from
the study. Regarding adherence, only three participants needed to replace two exercise
sessions at the end of the period, one from the Pilates group and two from the aerobic
group. Therefore, by the end of the study, all participants for the aerobic and Pilates groups
had completed 24 training sessions.
All participants from the three groups underwent tests performed over two consecutive
days at the Exercise Physiology Laboratory of the Federal University of São Paulo (São
Paulo, Brazil) both before and after the experimental protocol took place. The following
assessments were conducted: food intake, cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test,
isokinetic strength testing, body composition and anthropometry, abdominal endurance
test, trunk extensor endurance test, flexibility test and functional (stair and chair) tests.
As the control group did not follow an experimental protocol, for ethical reasons,
control participants were offered the opportunity to participate in the Pilates or Aerobic
program, according to the participant’s interest, after the conclusion of the study. Those
who participated in the experimental protocol were offered the opportunity to participate
in the other protocol that they did not take part in initially. Details of the study protocol
can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.p5wdq7e.
Assessments
Food intake assessment
Participants were asked to record their food intake for three days (two week days and one
weekend day) (Jeon et al., 2011). The participants were asked to write down a description
of the foods consumed, quantity per unit or portion sizes, type of preparation, and time
of day. The quantitative assessment of the food record was carried out by calculating total
energy consumption. An experienced nutritionist performed intake analysis using the Diet
Win Professional 2.0 software (Brazil). Participants were instructed to avoid changing their
diet habits during the experimental protocol.
Cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test
All participants submitted to a cardiorespiratory maximal test on a motorized treadmill
(Inbrasport, ATL, Porto Alegre, Brazil) with individualized ramp protocol in order to
identify VT, respiratory compensation point (RCP), and maximal or peak oxygen uptake
(˙
VO2max/peak). After one minute standing on the treadmill, the participants began the
test with 3 min of warm-up at 3 km/h and 0 degree of inclination. From the 4th minute
of testing, both speed (0.5 km/h) and inclination (0.5%) increased every 20 s. At the 6th
minute of the test, the participant reached the final speed (6 km/h), while the inclination
was increased every 20 s until the volunteer reached exhaustion. We chose this strategy
because overweight/obese population traditionally do not reach high velocities in CPET
and due to safety reasons. The same individual protocol for each volunteer was used in
the retest.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 6/26
Individual subjective level of exertion was obtained using the Borg scale (Noble et al.,
1983). In order to determine VT, RCP, and ( ˙
VO2max/peak), ventilation and expired
gases were measured breath by breath using a metabolic analyzer (Quark, Cosmed, Italy),
and all the measured data were considered as a mean of 20 s for analysis. Calibration
procedures were performed according to the manufacturer’s guidelines before each test.
VT and RCP were determined separately by two different experienced investigators,
according to established criteria (Beaver, Wasserman & Whipp, 1986). In cases where there
was no consensus between the investigators, a third experienced investigator was asked to
determine VT and RCP. VT was determined based on the following criteria: inflection in
the ventilation curve, increase in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen without increase in
the ventilatory equivalent for dioxide carbon, and increase in partial pressure of exhaled
oxygen. RCP was determined based on inflection in the ventilation curve, increase in the
ventilatory equivalent for oxygen and in the ventilatory equivalent for dioxide carbon,
and decrease in partial pressure of exhaled dioxide carbon (Whipp, Ward & Wasserman,
1986). Briefly, VT represents the most intense effort (expressed in terms of ˙
VO2and/or
workload) that can be performed without accumulation of lactate in blood (Whipp, Ward
& Wasserman, 1986).
˙
VO2max was the higher oxygen consumption value at the end of an incremental test,
despite an increase in the treadmill speed, featuring the ˙
VO2plateau. However, in clinical
testing situations, a clear plateau may not be detected. Consequently, ˙
VO2peak is often
used as an estimate for ˙
VO2max. For practical purposes, ˙
VO2max and ˙
VO2peak are used
interchangeably. ˙
VO2max is a useful measure of exercise tolerance, and low values indicate
poor aerobic physical fitness, and these data also have clinical significance (Howley, 2007).
Internal training load
After each training session, the aerobic and Pilates groups were asked to provide a rating of
perceived exertion (RPE, Borg scale) adapted by Foster et al. (2001), to calculate the load
of each session. Participants were asked about the rate of overall intensity of the training
session 30 min after the end of the activity. The result was multiplied by the duration of
the session, producing an index to monitor the internal training load.
Isokinetic strength testing
Before the isokinetic testing, the participants performed a 5-min warm-up on a cycle
ergometer (Cybex Inc., Ronkonkoma, NY, USA) at a resistance level of 25 watts, followed
by low-intensity dynamic stretching exercises for the hamstrings and quadriceps to avoid
stretching influence in strength values (Mascarin et al., 2015). Following the warm-up
period, participants were placed on the isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex Medical Systems
Inc., Shirley, NY, USA) to evaluate the isokinetic concentric strength of both lower limbs
in a random order. Peak torque (PT) of knee flexor and extensor muscles (both dominant
and non-dominant) in concentric activity was measured. Concentric activity was evaluated
at 60◦/s (the lowest speed in order to avoid high joint pressure while producing the highest
torque values) and 240◦/s (an angular speed closer to knee angular speed during the gait)
separated by a one-minute rest (Fleury et al., 2011). Low angular speed (60◦/s) was tested
first. Participants completed three submaximal trials before each angular speed test to
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 7/26
familiarize themselves with the equipment, and five maximal repetitions to test at 60◦/s
and at 240◦/s. The isokinetic dynamometer calibration procedure was performed according
to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Body composition and anthropometry
Body composition was assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA, software
version 12.3, Lunar DPX, Madison, WI, USA) in order to measure fat-free mass and fat
mass. This method has been previously demonstrated to be a safe method with minimum
radiation dosage and reliable technique for fat mass (Choi et al., 2015). BMI was calculated
by dividing body mass by height squared (kg/m2). A BMI ≥25 kg/m2indicates overweight,
while a BMI ≥30 kg/m2indicates obesity (World Health Organization, 2012).
Two different points of body circumference were considered: waist circumference (in
cm) was measured around the midpoint between the lower margin of the last palpable rib
and the top of the iliac crest; hip measurement was taken at the maximum circumference
over the buttocks (Reidpath et al., 2013).
Abdominal endurance test (sit-up test)
Abdominal endurance was evaluated using the partial trunk flexion test. Participants
performed the test lying down with knees flexed at 90◦, feet flat on the floor and hands
clasped behind the head. The trunk was raised to the point where the shoulders were lifted
from the mat. The maximum number of repetitions in one minute was measured (Sarti et
al., 1996).
Trunk extensor endurance test
Subjects underwent the Sorensen test to evaluate isometric endurance of the trunk extensor
muscles. The participant lay prone on an examination table with the upper border of the
iliac crests aligned with the edges of the table. The lower body was secured by three
belts located around the hip, knees, and ankles. The arms were crossed over the chest.
Participants were asked to isometrically maintain the upper body in a horizontal position
as long as possible. The time to exhaustion was measured in seconds. The test stopped after
a maximum of 240 s (Demoulin et al., 2006).
Flexibility test
Flexibility was evaluated using the sit and reach test, which specifically measures the
flexibility of the lower back and hamstring muscles. In this test, the participants sit on the
floor with lower limbs fully extended, ankles flexed, and feet flat against the box used for
the test. The participant must lean slowly and protrude forward as far as possible, sliding
their fingers along a ruler affixed to the upper side of the box. After two practice reaches,
the participant reaches out and holds the position for two seconds while the distance (in
centimeters) is recorded (Wells & Dillon, 1952).
Functional tests
Two different tests were performed to assess functional performance in activities of daily
living: the stair test and chair test. In the stair test, the subject must climb up and down a
set of 12 steps of 16 cm in height (total of 24 steps) twice. In the chair test, the subject must
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 8/26
get up out of and sit back down into a 50 cm-high chair 10 times. The runtimes for the two
tests were recorded in seconds. These tests were adapted from Pescatello et al. (2014).
Interventions
Pilates protocol
Participants who were in the Pilates group used a heart rate (HR) monitor (Suunto, Ambit,
Finland) during all sessions to verify HR, in order to know at which percentage of maximal
HR the volunteers performed the Pilates and in order to compare the mean HR obtained
(exercise intensity) of the two experimental protocols. This intervention was performed
at a Pilates Studio (CGPA Pilates Studio, São Paulo, Brazil) in groups (5 individuals per
group), oriented by the same qualified professional who had graduated in sports and
exercise science more than 20 years earlier and had experience in Pilates for 7 years. Each
session was composed of: pre-Pilates warm-up exercises (10 min. breathing, shoulder, hip
and spine alignment); Pilates (45 min. general conditioning with the traditional Pilates
repertoire of exercises for beginners and intermediates, mat Pilates, and the following
apparatus/equipment: reformer, cadillac, chair with adjustable spring resistance; high
barrel, and accessories like magic circles and 1-kg dumbbells); and cooldown (5 min.
respiratory exercises). All Pilates exercises were performed in a single series of repetitions,
and the number of exercises was increased according to the participant’s ability to
successfully complete the exercise (Table 1). When necessary, exercises were adapted
for obese and overweight body dimensions. An example of adaptation is in the Foot Work
exercise on the Reformer. The original position of the exercise would be lying down on the
Reformer, however some volunteers did not feel comfortable. A modification was made to
elevate the trunk to the recline position, with the help of a wooden board leaned against
the shoulder guard. In this way the volunteers could do the exercise comfortably, with no
suffering.
Aerobic training protocol
After cardiorespiratory maximal test (see details below), ventilatory threshold (VT) was
determined and each volunteer performed the walking program in the HR corresponding
to the VT. This walking intensity is considered safe to prevent orthopedic injuries in
participants with obesity (McQueen, 2009). Each section of the program lasted 60 min
and was performed three times per week for 8 weeks. In the first 10 min of each section,
volunteers performed warm-up exercises. After the warm-up, volunteers walked at an
intensity sufficient to maintain the HR in corresponding values to VT intensity for the next
40 min, and in the last 10 min they performed cooldown exercises. All participants used
an HR monitor (Suunto, Ambit, Finland) for monitoring HR during all training sessions,
and sessions were supervised at all times by a coach to ensure the HR had been maintained
at the target value. The sessions were performed at the Olympic Training and Research
Center (Centro Olímpico de Treinamento e Pesquisa; COTP, São Paulo, Brazil), in groups
(five individuals per group).
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 9/26
Table 1 List of Pilates exercises and apparatus.
Name of exercises Number of
repetitions
Evolution
in weeks
Mat Pilates Programa
Hundred 1 4th–8th
Single leg circles, single leg stretch, double leg stretch, spine
Stretch, saw, side kick
3–5 1st–8th
Single leg kick, double leg kick, spine twist 4–6 2nd–8th
Single straight leg stretch, criss-cross 5–10 4th–8th
Shoulder bridge, leg pull front 3–6 4th–8th
Program on Reformera
Footwork, tendon stretch, pelvic lift, running, 5–10 1st–8th
Short box series: round, flat back, twist 3–5 4th–8th
Long box series: pulling straps, T 5–8 4th–8th
Knee stretch series: round, arched back 5–8 4th–8th
Long stretch series: front, elephant, down stretch 5–8 4th–8th
Chest expansion kneeling, reverse chest expansion, splits
side, stomach massage, flat back, reach, twist
5–8 4th–8th
Program on Cadillaca
Roll down bar, breathing, chest expansion, thigh stretch 3–5 1st–8th
Push through seated front, spread eagle 3–5 1st–8th
Arm spring series (supine), leg spring series (supine) 3–5 1st–8th
Side lying series 5–10 4th–8th
Standing on floor: punching, salute, hug-a-tree, butterfly 3–6 4th–8th
Program on Chaira
Double leg pumps, single leg pumps, standing leg pump
front, side, crossover
5–10 1st–8th
Washer woman, swan front, seated mermaid 3–5 4th–8th
Frog lying flat, single leg pump lying flat, Achilles stretch 5–10 1st–8th
Program on Ladder Barrelb
Horse back 3 4th–8th
Short box series: round, flat back and twist 3–5 4th–8th
Program with Dumbbells–1kgb
Wall: circles, sliding, rolling down 3–5 1st–8th
Zip-up, chest expansion, shaving the head, arm circles, bi-
ceps curls (I, II), triceps extension, the bug, boxing, lunges
5–10 2nd–8th
Program with Magic Circlea
Arm work, leg work and head work series 5–10 1st–8th
Notes.
aList of Pilates Exercises & Equipment. Lessen (2014).
bSiler & Turlington (2000). Details of the study protocol can be found on http://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.p5wdq7e.
Statistical analyses
Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistica software (Statsoft, Inc., version 6.0
for Windows, Tulsa, OK, USA). Data were expressed as mean ±standard deviation (SD).
Variable distribution was tested by the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, and variability by the
Levene test. The sample size was planned to identify a difference between training groups
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 10/26
of at least 2% of fat mass in a relatively homogeneous group of healthy adults. To this end,
we used data from a pilot study. The target sample size was 20 participants in each group
(alpha 0.05 and power 0.80). After data collection, a two-way ANOVA for time vs. group
of fat mass (%) and the power observed (alpha =0.05) yielded the interaction effect of
0.87; therefore, we conclude that the sample size was sufficient for subsequent analysis.
To verify the effects of the intervention programs, a two-way ANCOVA, conducted by
using age as a covariate, was used to assess the groups (control vs. aerobic vs. Pilates) and
the time (pre- vs. post-training) differences for the following measures: anthropometric
and body composition; waist and hip circumferences; abdominal, trunk, chair, stair and
flexibility tests; and isokinetic and cardiorespiratory measurements. Newman–Keuls post
hoc test procedures were used to identify specific differences. In the absence of interactions,
only main effects were analyzed. Where age presented no significant difference for the
variable analyzed in ANCOVA test, a two-way ANOVA was used.
In order to compare the HR and RPE reached during the sessions between the two
intervention groups we used an unpaired Student’s ttest. Statistical significance was set at
an αof 0.05 for all statistical procedures.
Calculation of effect size (d) was adopted in addition to the traditional statistical
approaches. The measures of the effect size for changes in outcome were calculated by
dividing the mean difference by the SD of the pre-training measurement. By calculating
effect sizes, the magnitude of any change was judged according to the following criteria:
d=0.2 was considered a ‘‘small’’ effect size; d=0.5 represented a ‘‘medium’’ effect size;
and d=0.8 was a ‘‘large’’ effect size (Cohen, 1988). Percent changes and 90% confidence
intervals were also calculated.
RESULTS
All volunteers performed 24 exercise sessions. The two-way ANOVA (group vs. time)
revealed that there were no significant differences (pre- vs. post-training) in calorie intake
for all groups [F(2,57) =0.02744,p=0.97)]. The target HR training for the aerobic group
was 123 ±11 bpm, which represents about 78.0 ±7.3% of the maximal HR (160 ±16 bpm)
reached during the cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test. The Pilates group reached
an HR training of 86 ±6 bpm, which represents about 62.7 ±13.2% of the maximal HR
reached in the cardiopulmonary treadmill test. Thus, HR during training was significantly
higher (1%= +42.2%) in the aerobic group than in the Pilates group (p<0.0001; see
Table 2). Moreover, the internal training load was also higher (1%= +31.3%) in the
aerobic group than in the Pilates group (p=0.04; see Table 2).
Two-way ANCOVA (group vs. time), using age as a covariate, revealed that the age
presented a significant effect for abdominal strength test, flexibility test, stair test, peak
torque for dominant and non-dominant extensor muscles at 240◦/s and HR assessed at
VT, RCP and maximal exercise. Therefore, the results presented for these variables were
from ANCOVA using age as a covariate. Results presented for the other variables (BMI,
total body mass, fat mass, fat free mass, waist and hip circumference, trunk endurance test,
chair test, peak torque for extensor and flexors muscles at 60◦/s and 240◦/s and for flexors
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 11/26
Table 2 Average heart rate and internal training load during training for Pilates and aerobic groups.
Variables Pilates
(n=22)
Aerobic
(n=21)
1%pvalue dvalue 90% CI
Average HR (bpm) 86 ±6 123 ±11*+42.2 <0.0001 4.1 2.5–5.7
Internal training load 192 ±69 252 ±106*+31.3 0.04 0.67 0.14–1.2
Notes.
Data are mean ±standard deviation.
HR, heart rate; bpm, beats per minute; d, Cohen deffect size; CI, confidence interval.
aAerobic > Pilates.
at 240/s and ˙
VO2at VT, RCP, or maximal exercise) were from ANOVA (group vs. time),
once age presented no significant difference in the analysis of these variables.
There were no significant differences in body composition, anthropometric
measurements, and functional tasks among the three groups at baseline (Table 3), except
for the abdominal endurance test [F(2,57) =3.69,p=0.031]. The aerobic group had
higher values than both the control group (p=0.02) and the Pilates group (p=0.01; see
Table 3).
As expected, after an 8-week period, the control group showed no differences in any
of the outcome variables., except for abdominal test performance with higher values
after the experimental period (p=0.02, d=0.57 and 1%= +9.3±14.8%). Total body
mass did not change in any of the groups and despite the significant improvement, in fat
mass (1%= −3.7±5.2%) and lean mass (1%= +3.2±5.0%) in the Pilates group,
its effect was classified as small (d=0.19). There was no difference in body composition
between groups after the intervention period (p >0.05). As expected, the Pilates and aerobic
groups showed significant improvements in waist circumference (p=0.0009,p=0.0001,
respectively), hip circumference (p=0.0001,p=0.001, respectively), abdominal test
(p=0.0001,p=0.003, respectively), and chair test (p=0.0001,p=0.005, respectively)
and stair test (p=0.003,p=0.046, respectively). Trunk test and flexibility test improved
only in the Pilates group (p=0.0003 and p=0.0001, respectively; see Table 3).
As both the Pilates and aerobic groups showed significant improvements in some
outcome variables after the intervention, the effect size was also measured and the difference
between pre- and post-tests was also expressed as perceptual difference (Table 3). The effect
size and perceptual difference of the Pilates and aerobic training in waist (d=0.27, 1%=
−2.6 ±2.9% and d=0.37, 1%= −3.3 ±3.7%, respectively) and hip circumference
(d=0.17, 1%= −1.5±1.6% and d=0.14, 1%= −0.8±1.0%, respectively)
were classified as medium for waist values and small for hip values. There was also no
significant difference between groups after intervention (p>0.05). Despite a significant
improvement in the abdominal test in all three groups (d=1.69, 1%=25.6±13.5;
d=0.95, 1%=11.0 ±16.7% and d=0.58, 1%=9.3±14.8% for Pilates, aerobic and
control groups, respectively), the effect size and perceptual difference for the Pilates group
were greater than the effect size and perceptual difference for the aerobic group, which also
were greater than these variables for the control group. Moreover, after the intervention
period, the control group showed significantly lower values for the abdominal test than the
Pilates (p=0.005) and aerobic groups (p=0.004).
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 12/26
Table 3 Effects of 8 weeks of Pilates or aerobic training on variables assessed.
Pre Post 1%p
value
d
value
90%
CI
Pilates group (n=22)
BMI (kg/m2) 31.9 ±3.9 31.6 ±4.0a−1.1 ±1.8 0.009 0.07 0.01–0.13
Total body mass (kg) 81.0 ±10.0 80.8 ±10.2 −0.5 ±1.4 0.19 0.01 −0.01–0.03
Fat mass (%) 50.9 ±6.1b49.1 ±5.8a−3.7 ±5.2 0.0001 0.19 0.11–0.27
Lean mass (kg) 38.4 ±6.5 39.7 ±6.6a3.2 ±5.0 0.0005 0.19 0.11–0.27
Waist circumference (cm) 105.6 ±9.8 102.9 ±9.9a−2.6 ±2.9 0.0009 0.27 0.14–0.40
Hip circumference (cm) 115.7 ±9.4 114.0 ±10.1a−1.5 ±1.6 0.0001 0.17 0.1–0.24
Abdominal test
(no. of repetitions)
30.7 ±6.3 41.6 ±6.6a25.6 ±13.5 0.0001 1.69 1.0–2.40
Trunk extensor test (s) 89.5 ±42.8 129.4 ±55.7a28.7 ±23.6 0.0003 0.80 0.46–1.10
Chair test (s) 24.5 ±3.3 19.6 ±3.3a−26.9 ±27.9 0.0001 1.48 0.89–2.10
Stair test (s) 25.3 ±3.4 22.8 ±3.0a−9.8 ±7.9 0.003 0.78 0.40–1.20
Flexibility (cm) 21.5 ±10.7 25.6 ±9.4a21.8 ±21.6 0.0001 0.41 0.25–0.57
Aerobic group (n=21)
BMI (kg/m2) 30.3 ±3.3 30.1 ±3.4 −0.6 ±1.8 0.12 0.05 −0.01–0.10
Total body mass (kg) 77.7 ±10.6 77.4 ±10.6 −0.5 ±1.8 0.20 0.03 −0.01–0.07
Fat mass (%) 46.4 ±6.2 45.9 ±6.4 −1.2 ±2.4 0.60 0.05 −0.03–0.14
Lean mass (kg) 40.0 ±5.5 40.2 ±5.6 0.5 ±2.7 0.49 0.03 −0.04–0.10
Waist circumference (cm) 102.7 ±8.4 99.5 ±8.8a−3.3 ±3.7 0.0001 0.37 0.22–0.52
Hip circumference (cm) 111.6 ±7.2 110.6 ±7.3a−0.8 ±1.0 0.001 0.14 0.07–0.21
Abdominal test
(no. of repetitions)
36.9 ±5.6c42.1 ±5.3a11.0 ±16.7 0.003 0.95 0.46–1.40
Trunk extensor test (s) 102.6 ±39.0 117.2 ±53.3 3.4 ±40.8 0.09 0.31 0.02–0.60
Chair test (s) 22.7 ±3.4 20.5 ±2.3a−11.3 ±16.5 0.005 0.75 0.28–1.20
Stair test (s) 24.3 ±3.1 22.8 ±4.1a−7.4 ±10.5 0.046 0.41 0.10–0.72
Flexibility (cm) 20.6 ±9.9 21.7 ±9.5 10.4 ±23.9 0.10 0.11 0.01–0.21
Control group (n=17)
BMI (kg/m2) 31.0 ±4.1 31.1 ±3.9 0.4 ±1.1 0.27 0.02 −0.01–0.05
Total body mass (kg) 82.6 ±16.6 82.9 ±16.4 0.4 ±1.1 0.34 0.01 −0.01–0.02
Fat mass (%) 45.7 ±7.7 46.0 ±7.6 0.6 ±3.9 0.49 0.04 −0.01–0.09
Lean mass (kg) 43.6 ±10.5 43.6 ±10.2 0.0 ±3.1 0.93 0 0
Waist circumference (cm) 102.9 ±10.5 103.5 ±10.8 0.5 ±1.4 0.41 0.02 −0.02–0.06
Hip circumference (cm) 109.2 ±9.8 109.4 ±10.0 0.3 ±0.5 0.26 0.02 −0.01–0.05
Abdominal test
(no. of repetitions)
31.9 ±6.1 35.6 ±6.7d,a9.3 ±14.8 0.02 0.57 0.17–0.97
Trunk extensor test (s) 90.2 ±25.6 91.4 ±42.6 −9.1 ±40.0 0.92 0.03 −0.47–0.53
Chair test (s) 23.1 ±4.3 22.9 ±3.5d−1.3 ±14.8 0.78 0.05 −0.25–0.35
Stair test (s) 23.7 ±3.5 23.9 ±3.3 0.5 ±11.4 0.65 0.05 −0.13–0.23
Flexibility (cm) 19.0 ±12.0 19.0 ±11.8 2.1 ±13.2 1.00 0 0
Notes.
Data are mean ±standard deviation.
BMI, body mass index; d, Cohen deffect size; CI, confidence interval.
ap<0.05 (different from the pre-training for the same group).
bp<0.05 (pre-training values for Control group 6= pre-training values for Pilates group).
cp<0.05 (pre-training values for Aerobic group 6= pre-training values for Pilates and Control groups).
dp<0.05 (pos-training values for Control group 6= pos-training values for Pilates and Aerobic groups).
dp<0.05 (pos-training values for Control group 6= pos-training values for Pilates group).
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 13/26
Results of the two evaluated functional tasks differed across the groups. On the
chair test [F(2,57) =8.49,p=0.00], the improvement observed in the Pilates group
(1%= −26.9±27.9%, d=1.48, p=0.0001) was greater than that seen in the aerobic
group (1%= −11.3±16.5%, p=0.005, d=0.75). Moreover, only the Pilates group
showed a significant improvement performance in the chair test than the control group
(p=0.02, 1%=30.0±27.9%) after the intervention period. In the same direction, the
stair test [F(2,57) =4.00, p=0.024]. The improvement observed in the Pilates group was
also greater than that seen in the aerobic group (d=0.78, 1%=9.8±7.9% and d=0.41,
1%=7.4±10.5%, respectively). However, there were no significant differences between
groups after the intervention period.
Isokinetic PT for dominant (p=0.02) and non-dominant (p=0.02) extensor muscles
(60◦/s) were significantly lower for the Pilates group than for controls at baseline. However,
after the 8-week period, neither isokinetic PT of flexor nor for extensor muscles in both
dominant and non-dominant limbs presented significant differences (pre- vs. post-
intervention) in any of the three groups at any angular speed tested (60◦/s and 240◦/s; see
Table 4).
Regarding cardiorespiratory fitness prior to the intervention period at baseline, there
were no significant differences between the three groups in ˙
VO2values at VT, RCP, or
max values (p >0.05). The Pilates group presented lower HR values than the aerobic
(p=0.0002) and control groups (p=0.0002) in VT, and than the aerobic (p=0.004)
and control (p=0.005) groups in RCP, and lower values than the aerobic (p=0.03) and
control (p=0.001) group in maximal effort. After the training period, the Pilates group
presented a significant increase in ˙
VO2and in HR reached at VT (p=0.001 and p=0.0005,
respectively), RCP (p=0.01 and p=0.01, respectively) and at maximum effort (p=0.01
and p=0.003, respectively) (Table 5). The control group presented significant different HR
in maximal effort after and before the intervention period (p=0.02). The aerobic group
presented no significant difference in any cardiorespiratory variables measured (Table 5).
Despite the significant increase in ˙
VO2at VT (p=0.001, d=0.60, 1%=11.6±17.6%),
RCP (p=0.01, d=0.48, 1%=7.9±19.5%) and maximum values (p=0.01, d=0.33,
1%=19.9±15.5%) observed only in the Pilates group, after the experimental period
there were no differences between the groups.
DISCUSSION
This study compared the impact of Pilates and aerobic training on cardiorespiratory
fitness, isokinetic muscular strength, body composition, flexibility, trunk and abdominal
endurance, and functional task outcomes for overweight/obese individuals. Our main
findings were that BMI, lean mass, fat mass, waist circumference, hip circumference,
abdominal and trunk strength tests, chair and stair test, flexibility and ˙
VO2assessed
at VT, RCP and at maximum effort improved in Pilates group. Conversely, only waist
and hip circumference, abdominal strength test, and chair and stair test improved in
aerobic training group. Abdominal strength test was lower in control group than in both
intervention groups in post-tests and chair test were lower in control than in Pilates group
in post-tests.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 14/26
Table 4 Isokinetic strength measured at 60◦/s and at 240◦/s, pre- and post-training, for Pilates, aerobic, and control groups.
Variables Pre Post 1%p
value
d
values
90% CI
Pilates (n=22)
60◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 128.9 ±37.6b138.6 ±36.2 5.5 ±12.2 0.34 0.26 −0.19–0.71
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 124.4 ±36.2 119.2 ±39.3 −0.9 ±15.5 0.83 0.13 −0.88–1.10
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 65.7 ±27.4 72.6 ±24.7 5.0 ±28.6 1.00 0.26 −34.0–35.0
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 62.6 ±19.3 67.4 ±16.5 5.1 ±17.9 0.98 0.25 −16.0–17.0
240◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 75.8 ±21.9b76.2 ±23.7 6.6 ±13.1 0.83 0.02 −0.14–0.18
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 72.4 ±21.5b74.3 ±18.1 2.1 ±19.3 0.58 0.01 −0.02–0.04
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 65.8 ±27.4 51.1 ±14.0 8.3 ±22.2 0.50 0.67 −0.98–2.30
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 62.6 ±19.3 46.3 ±12.4 7.9 ±19.1 0.29 1.00 −0.57–2.60
Aerobic (n=21)
60◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 146.5 ±25.0 146.4 ±24.2 −1.1 ±15.9 1.00 0.00 0
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 137.5 ±38.1 135.9 ±36.2 −2.2 ±16.5 0.99 0.04 −5.30–5.40
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 75.5 ±28.9 72.6 ±19.1 −5.7 ±27.4 0.99 0.12 −16.0–16.0
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 63.1 ±19.1 68.9 ±17.8 8.2 ±16.1 0.99 0.31 −41.0–41.0
240◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 90.3 ±14.7 89.2 ±16.9 −2.2 ±10.9 0.98 0.07 −4.60–4.70
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 87.0 ±18.5 85.3 ±20.6 −4.5 ±20.9 0.17 0.08 −0.02–0.18
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 52.8 ±9.5 55.7 ±14.4 2.4 ±19.2 0.84 0.23 −1.70–2.10
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 52.5 ±10.0 50.9 ±10.9 −5.5 ±19.3 0.95 0.15 −3.80–4.10
Control (n=17)
60◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 165.9 ±36.6 163.6 ±38.3 −3.0 ±112 0.99 0.06 −7.90–8.00
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 157.1 ±34.8 161.2 ±38.9 0.3 ±13.7 0.98 0.11 −7.20–7.40
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 76.9 ±18.5 80.4 ±20.8 2.4 ±11.4 0.89 0.18 −2.00–2.30
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 74.2 ±21.6 74.4 ±22.5 −0.9 ±16.3 0.32 0.01 −0.01–0.02
240◦/s
PT/BM extensor dominant (%) 99.0 ±19.9 103.5 ±21.4 3.7 ±6.9 0.98 0.22 −14.0–15.0
PT/BM extensor non-dominant (%) 95.6 ±18.9 102.4 ±22.9 4.9 ±10.4 1.00 0.32 −42.0–43.0
PT/BM flexor dominant (%) 53.7 ±15.5 55.5 ±11.4 2.9 ±12.2 0.98 0.13 −8.50–8.80
PT/BM flexor non-dominant (%) 53.6 ±12.6 53.3 ±13.4 −3.0 ±20.6 0.99 0.02 −2.60–2.70
Notes.
Data are mean ±standard deviation.
PT, peak torque; BM, body mass; d, Cohen deffect size; CI, confidence interval.
*p<0.05 (pre vs. post).
#p<0.05 (Pilates vs. Control).
Body composition effects
Traditionally, body mass reduction by decreasing fat mass is the main goal in obesity
treatment, and several studies have investigated the effects of exercise for that purpose,
although the importance of physical activity for weight loss assessed by body weight or
BMI is controversial (Pedersen & Saltin, 2015). The aerobic exercise protocol employed in
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 15/26
Table 5 Effects of 8 weeks of Pilates or aerobic training on cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test results for Pilates, Aerobic and Control
groups.
Variables Pre Post 1%pvalue dvalue 90% CI
Pilates (n=22)
˙
VO2in VT (mL/kg/min) 15.0 ±2.6 17.2 ±3.4*11.6 ±17.6 <0.01 0.60 0.31–0.89
HR in VT (bpm) 109 ±13b122 ±15*10 ±11 <0.01 0.90 0.47–1.30
˙
VO2in RCP (mL/kg/min) 19.4 ±3.6 21.1 ±4.1*7.9 ±19.5 0.01 0.48 0.18–0.78
HR in RCP (bpm) 130 ±15b139 ±15 6.0 ±9.6 0.01 0.56 0.21–0.91
˙
VO2max (mL/kg/min) 22.4 ±4.9 24.2 ±4.5*19.9 ±15.5 0.01 0.33 0.12–0.54
HRmax (bpm) 146 ±21b155 ±16*6.2 ±11.7 <0.01 0.48 0.24–0.72
Aerobic (n=21)
˙
VO2in VT (mL/kg/min) 18.7 ±2.7 20.1 ±3.2 6.1 ±10.2 0.22 0.38 0.05–0.71
HR in VT (bpm) 126 ±10 127 ±17 −0.7 ±16.6 0.93 0.09 −0.16–1.8
˙
VO2in RCP (mL/kg/min) 23.2 ±3.8 24.3 ±3.8 3.0 ±12.3 0.72 0.21 −0.13–0.55
HR in RCP (bpm) 146 ±16 145 ±19 −1.8 ±11.0 0.91 0.03 −0.09–0.15
˙
VO2max (mL/kg/min) 26.8 ±4.3 27.0 ±4.4 14.8 ±10.5 0.64 0.13 −0.11–0.37
HRmax (bpm) 160 ±16 158 ±19 −1.7 ±6.6 0.48 0.12 −0.16–0.40
Control (n=17)
˙
VO2in VT (mL/kg/min) 17.9 ±3.9 18.7 ±4.3 3.4 ±14.7 0.18 0.19 −0.04–0.42
HR in VT (bpm) 127 ±11 128 ±10 0.4 ±10.0 0.94 0.10 −2.10–2.30
˙
VO2in RCP (mL/kg/min) 22.3 ±4.9 22.4 ±4.5 −1.2 ±10.1 0.73 0.04 −0.15–0.23
HR in RCP (bpm) 146 ±13 145 ±10 −0.8 ±6.3 0.92 0.05 −0.78–0.88
˙
VO2max(mL/kg/min) 25.9 ±5.4 25.2 ±4.7 9.8 ±11.5 0.31 0.08 −0.05–0.21
HRmax (bpm) 165 ±12 156 ±12*−6.2 ±6.5 0.02 0.74 0.22–1,30
Notes.
Data are mean ±standard deviation.
˙
VO2, oxygen uptake; ˙
VO2max, maximal oxygen uptake; HR, heart rate; HRmax, maximal heart rate; VT, ventilatory threshold; RCP, respiratory compensation point; d,
Cohen deffect size; CI, confidence interval.
ap<0.05 (pre vs. post).
bp<0.05 (Pilates < Aerobic and Control).
the present study promoted no difference in body composition. Cheema et al. (2015) also
failed to find a significant loss of fat mass percentage after an aerobic program performed
at moderate intensity for 12 weeks. Most likely, the amount of exercise (volume and/or
intensity) necessary to produce weight loss needed to be greater than the one implemented
in our study, and a restrictive diet would also be necessary for body mass loss.
Changes induced by the Pilates were greater than those promoted by aerobic training, as
the Pilates group presented a significant increase in lean mass and decrease in fat mass. These
results suggest that Pilates may be an interesting alternative to traditional aerobic training
in order to improve body composition (Jago et al., 2006;Rogers & Gibson, 2009;Şavkin &
Aslan, 2017). Conversely, due to the small effect size, the results should be viewed with
caution. Moreover, there were no differences between groups after the intervention period.
Previous studies also show effective results for Pilates in reducing fat mass and increasing
fat free mass (Rogers & Gibson, 2009;Şavkin & Aslan, 2017). Therefore, despite the small
effect size observed in our study after the Pilates, our results are in line with the literature.
Conversely, these results are not a consensus. Segal, Hein & Basford (2004) showed no
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 16/26
significant difference in body composition after Pilates. Methodological differences may
be responsible for these conflicting results; different indirect methods—which tend to be
inaccurate—used to assess body composition (Rogers & Gibson, 2009); a lack of information
about the instructors’ certification (Segal, Hein & Basford, 2004;Rogers & Gibson, 2009);
and significant differences in the protocol used (Pilates mats or apparatus, sessions per
week and program duration); associated with a lack of diet control (Segal, Hein & Basford,
2004) hamper definitive conclusions on this topic. Considering that DXA, which has been
previously demonstrated to be reliable (Choi et al., 2015) was used in our study to measure
body composition, it can be concluded that Pilates may be considered an alternative exercise
program for improving body composition.
Functional tasks tests
Both the aerobic and Pilates groups showed significant improvement on both tests, unlike
the control group. However, the improvements on the chair and stair tests in the Pilates
group were greater (i.e., had a higher effect size) than in the aerobic group. Moreover, only
the Pilates group presented significantly better results in the chair test than the control
group after the intervention. This improvement in functional tasks presented in both
experimental groups is of fundamental importance for independent living and mobility
(Miller & Wolfe, 2008).
Abdominal and trunk strength test and flexibility test
The abdominal and trunk strength tests performed in this study have been found to
be reliable field tests (Sparling, Millard-Stafford & Snow, 1997;Demoulin et al., 2006).
Moreover, sit and reach test has also been found to be reliable (Bozic et al., 2010). All three
groups had higher values for the abdominal test after the 8-week intervention, suggesting
that there was a learning effect on this test demonstrated by the improvement in the
control group. Notwithstanding, both the intervention groups presented significantly
higher results in the abdominal test after the intervention period than the control group.
Demonstrating that both the aerobic and Pilates interventions were effective to improve
abdominal strength. It is important to notice that the Pilates was more effective to improve
abdominal muscle strength, demonstrated by the higher effect size value. In the same
direction, trunk extensor muscle endurance showed a significant improvement only in
the Pilates group, in the same way as flexibility. In general, these results were expected,
since the Pilates method focuses on these muscles through posture and core exercises
(Şavkin & Aslan, 2017). Although the effect size of this improvement was classified as large,
after the intervention period there were no significant differences between groups. The
individuals from each group were quite different and the SD of the measurements was
very high; this may be the reason for the absence of significant difference between groups
after the intervention, despite the improvement observed only in the Pilates group. We
therefore conclude that for functional tasks (chair and stair tests), trunk and abdominal
endurance tests, both training programs should be considered, but the Pilates can produce
better results.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 17/26
Isokinetic strength test
Isokinetic dynamometry is a method commonly used to assess muscle performance,
both in research and in clinical practice (Granata, Abel & Damiano, 2000;Fleury et al.,
2011;Andrade et al., 2013). As has been previously demonstrated, isokinetic dynamometry
is a reliable and sensitive instrument to evaluate therapeutic intervention outcomes,
including in young or elderly people (Capranica et al., 1998;Eitzen, Hakestad & Risberg,
2012;Andrade et al., 2013).
Isokinetic muscular strength, mainly in the Pilates group, was expected to show a
significant improvement, but there were no changes in isokinetic PT for either muscular
group assessed (knee flexor and extensor muscles) at 60◦/s and 240◦/s. Since Pilates exercises
are not isokinetic exercises, the mode of contraction and the angular speed are different,
and this lack of specificity of the evaluation (isokinetic dynamometer) may contribute to
unexpected results. Another possible explanation for the absence of difference in isokinetic
strength results after the intervention in the Pilates group may be related to the lower
power of isokinetic analysis. For flexor and extensor PT values, the observed power ranged
from 0.06 to 0.43. Lower power means that there is a high probability of concluding there
is no effect when one actually exists. In other words, the number of subjects in this study
might be not sufficient to ensure (to a particular degree of certainty) that the interventions
produced no effects on muscular isokinetic strength.
Cardiorespiratory maximal treadmill test
In the present study, the Pilates group showed a significant increase in ˙
VO2max after the
intervention, which did not occur in the aerobic group, although the Pilates intervention was
less intense than the walking intervention (internal training load 192 ±69 vs. 252 ±106).
The lack of ˙
VO2max improvement after aerobic training was in accordance with previous
data (Shinkai et al., 1994;Fiorilli et al., 2017). Shinkai et al. (1994) studied the effects on
˙
VO2max of a 12-week aerobic program plus voluntary food restriction for mildly obese
middle-age women. The authors observed no change in absolute ˙
VO2max/peak values
(L/min), and a significant increase only in relative ˙
VO2max/peak values (mL/kg/min) after
the program, which could be attributed to the significant body mass loss observed, instead
of a real ˙
VO2max improvement. Fiorilli et al. (2017) also studied the effects on ˙
VO2max
of an aerobic or resistance program. Interestingly, their results showed higher ˙
VO2max
values for the resistance-training group than for the aerobic training group.
With regards to ˙
VO2max, this variable can be derived from the Fick equation:
˙
V O2max =COmaxx(Ca −C ¯v )O2max. Therefore, ˙
VO2max depends on the maximal
CO (cardiac output) and the maximal (Ca −CO¯v2)O2max) (difference between oxygen
concentration taken from arterial and mixed venous blood). In most situations,
(Ca −C ¯v2)O2max) does not vary much between individuals, so the ˙
V O2is usually
limited by the maximal CO (Bassett & Howley, 2000); however, in some special situations,
such as detraining, very sedentary people or muscular dystrophy, it may be limited by a
low maximal (Ca-C ¯v2)O2, resulting from a low muscular mass capacity.
It is probable that the ˙
VO2max/peak improved in the Pilates group as a consequence
of a higher maximal CO resulting from the higher maximal HR reached at the end of the
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 18/26
cardiopulmonary test. Moreover, as indicated above, in detraining or very sedentary people,
the ˙
VO2max may be limited by a low maximal (Ca-CO ¯v2)O2. Considering that the Pilates
group exercises are focused on muscular conditioning, it is possible that the increase in the
˙
VO2max/peak resulted from the observed muscular mass improvement after the program,
too. However, it was not possible to state that the aerobic capacity of the muscular mass
has increased. The aerobic group failed to show an improvement in the ˙
VO2max/peak
after the training period. During the walking session, the HR mean was 123 ±11 bpm (HR
corresponding to the VT), which represents about 78% of the maximal HR for this group,
which is in accordance with aerobic program recommendations (training intensity greater
than 60% of the HRmax, with 3–5 sessions/week for 30 min/session). Although moderate
aerobic exercise has been extensively suggested for obese people (Pedersen & Saltin, 2015;
Burgess et al., 2017;Mabire et al., 2017), our data were in line with other previous literature
data (Cheema et al., 2015) which demonstrated that moderate walking performed for 3
months (4 times a week) was not effective to improve aerobic fitness in overweight and
obese adults. It is possible that an even greater effort intensity or training period is necessary
to produce an increase of maximal CO and/or maximal (Ca-CO ¯v2)O2resulting in greater
˙
VO2max/peak. Other studies that used high-intensity interval training showed significant
improvement in the ˙
VO2max/peak (Cheema et al., 2015;Ruffino et al., 2017), so exercise
intensity may be crucial to improve the ˙
VO2max/peak.
Although there was no significant difference between groups after the intervention
period, the improvement in ˙
VO2max/peak in the Pilates group was classified as medium,
and considering the strong association between an increase in the ˙
VO2max/peak and
reduced all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality (Lee et al., 2011;Barlow et al., 2012),
this is a meaningful benefit of Pilates.
VT is another aerobic index that has great practical application. Besides VT, prolonged
exercise leads to progressive metabolic acidosis and exhaustion. VT depends on peripheral
circulatory factors, specifically on the oxidative capacity of the contracting muscles
(Weltman, 1995). In this study, the ˙
VO2in the VT increased significantly only in the
Pilates group (d=0.6). Muscle conditioning is one of the objectives of the Pilates. Possibly
better muscle conditioning, characterized by improved peripheral capillarization and
muscle oxidative capacity, were responsible for the ˙
VO2improvement measured at the VT.
In order to better understand the ˙
VO2max/peak, VT, and RCP improvement in the Pilates
group, future studies should evaluate muscular oxidative capacity. In addition, further
studies, aiming to investigate the Pilates and walking training effects on more general
health parameters, such as the risk of morbidity and mortality, or on muscular oxidative
capacity should be developed.
Strengths and limitations of this study
The external validity of the study was guaranteed through an extensive process of
volunteer recruitment (social networks and within the medical school) and through
the randomization process that divided the volunteers between the two intervention
groups. One should, however, consider the cost of a Pilates practice program in a studio.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 19/26
This aspect should be taken into consideration in the appointment of a physical health
program for individuals who are overweight/obese.
A possible bias of this study is the inclusion of both men and women. However, an
attenuating factor is that both intervention groups contained the same number of men.
Another possible bias is the lack of randomization between control and experimental
groups. Twenty-five volunteers asked to participate in the control group, because the
intervention protocol (Pilates or walking sessions) was during their working hours. If a
random order were used, very intense encouragement would be necessary to guarantee
adherence, creating an unreal situation. In order to avoid this bias, these volunteers were
allocated to the control group. Choosing for non-randomization between the control and
experimental groups could have created a bias as a result of the lack of homogeneity of
the baseline data, which, fortunately, did not occur; there was no significant difference
in baseline data for muscular performance (strength, endurance, and flexibility), body
composition, or functional tasks outcomes.
The same intervention period of 8 weeks was performed for both Aerobic and Pilates
groups. It was chosen as it was important that the two groups were submitted to the same
training volume. Considering that the aerobic training is usually performed for 12 weeks in
previous studies, perhaps other outcomes can be found with longer intervention periods.
CONCLUSION
To our knowledge, this is the first study comparing Pilates with traditionally aerobic exercise
for overweight or obese subjects. Pilates should be considered as an interesting alternative
physical fitness program for individuals who are overweight or obese, since it can lead to
significant improvements in body composition, general strength (trunk and abdominal),
flexibility, ability to accomplish functional tasks, and cardiorespiratory fitness.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank all of the participants who volunteered their time to participate in
the study, the Olympic Training and Research Center (Centro Olímpico de Treinamento
e Pesquisa, COTP, São Paulo, Brazil), and the CGPA Pilates Studio (São Paulo, Brazil).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DECLARATIONS
Funding
This work was supported by the Funda¸
cão de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
(FAPESP) (grant number: 2013/08245-2). Ricardo Borges Viana had a fellowship from the
Coordena¸
cão de Aperfei¸
coamento de Pessoal de Ensino Superior (CAPES/ - Coordination
for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel, Brazil). The funders had no role
in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the
manuscript.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 20/26
Grant Disclosures
The following grant information was disclosed by the authors:
Funda¸
cão de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP): 2013/08245-2.
Coordena¸
cão de Aperfei¸
coamento de Pessoal de Ensino Superior (CAPES/ - Coordination
for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel, Brazil.
Competing Interests
The authors declare there are no competing interests.
Author Contributions
•Angeles Bonal Rosell Rayes conceived and designed the experiments, performed the
experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed
drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
•Claudio Andre B. de Lira and Marilia S. Andrade conceived and designed the experiments,
analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or
tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
•Ricardo B. Viana prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the
paper, approved the final draft.
•Ana A. Benedito-Silva conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data,
authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
•Rodrigo L. Vancini authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
•Naryana Mascarin performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed
drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.
Human Ethics
The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body
and any reference numbers):
The Federal University of São Paulo granted Ethical approval to carry out the study
within its facilities (ethical Application Ref: 197.451).
Clinical Trial Ethics
The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body
and any reference numbers):
The Brazilian Registry of Clinical Essays (ReBEC, Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clínicos
–www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br) approved this research. (Ethical Application Ref: RBR-
7QNSH6) http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-7qnsh6/.
Data Availability
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
All raw data are provided in the Supplemental Files.
Clinical Trial Registration
The following information was supplied regarding Clinical Trial registration:
rbr-7qnsh6.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 21/26
Supplemental Information
Supplemental information for this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/
peerj.6022#supplemental-information.
REFERENCES
Aladro-Gonzalvo AR, Machado-Díaz M, Moncada-Jiménez J, Hernández-Elizondo
J, Araya-Vargas G. 2012. The effect of Pilates exercises on body composition:
a systematic review. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies 16:109–114
DOI 10.1016/j.jbmt.2011.06.001.
Andrade M dos S, De Lira CAB, Vancini RL, De Almeida AA, Benedito-Silva AA,
Da Silva AC. 2013. Profiling the isokinetic shoulder rotator muscle strength in 13- to
36-year-old male and female handball players. Physical Therapy in Sport 14:246–252
DOI 10.1016/j.ptsp.2012.12.002.
Barlow CE, Defina LF, Radford NB, Berry JD, Cooper KH, Haskell WL, Jones LW,
Lakoski SG. 2012. Cardiorespiratory fitness and long-term survival in low-risk
adults. Journal of the American Heart Association 1:e001354
DOI 10.1161/JAHA.112.001354.
Barry VW, Baruth M, Beets MW, Durstine JL, Liu J, Blair SN. 2014. Fitness vs. fat-
ness on all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases
56:382–390 DOI 10.1016/j.pcad.2013.09.002.
Bassett DR, Howley ET. 2000. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and
determinants of endurance performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
32:70–84 DOI 10.1097/00005768-200001000-00012.
Beaver WL, Wasserman K, Whipp BJ. 1986. A new method for detecting anaer-
obic threshold by gas exchange. Journal of Applied Physiology 60:2020–2027
DOI 10.1152/jappl.1986.60.6.2020.
Bozic PR, Pazin NR, Berjan BB, Planic NM, Cuk ID. 2010. Evaluation of the field
tests of flexibility of the lower extremity: reliability and the concurrent and
factorial validity. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 24:2523–2531
DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181def5e4.
Burgess E, Hassmén P, Welvaert M, Pumpa KL. 2017. Behavioural treatment
strategies improve adherence to lifestyle intervention programmes in adults
with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Obesity 7:105–114
DOI 10.1111/cob.12180.
Capranica L, Battenti M, Demarie S, Figura F. 1998. Reliability of isokinetic knee
extension and flexion strength testing in elderly women. Journal of Sports Medicine
and Physical Fitness 38:169–176 DOI 10.1590/S1413-35552012005000074.
Cheema BS, Davies TB, Stewart M, Papalia S, Atlantis E. 2015. The feasibility and
effectiveness of high-intensity boxing training versus moderate-intensity brisk
walking in adults with abdominal obesity: a pilot study. BMC Sports Science, Medicine
and Rehabilitation 7:3 DOI 10.1186/2052-1847-7-3.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 22/26
Choi YJ, Seo YK, Lee EJ, Chung YS. 2015. Quantification of visceral fat using dual-energy
X-ray absorptiometry and its reliability according to the amount of visceral fat in
Korean adults. Journal of Clinical Densitometry 18:192–197.
Cohen J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences statistical power analysis
for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale-New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt
M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P. 2003. International physical activity
questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Medicine & Science in Sports &
Exercise 35:1381–1395 DOI 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB.
De Oliveira Francisco C, De Almeida Fagundes A, Gorges B. 2015. Effects of Pilates
method in elderly people: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Journal
of Bodywork and Movement Therapies 19:500–508 DOI 10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.03.003.
Demoulin C, Vanderthommen M, Duysens C, Crielaard J-M. 2006. Spinal muscle
evaluation using the Sorensen test: a critical appraisal of the literature. Joint Bone
Spine 73:43–50 DOI 10.1016/j.jbspin.2004.08.002.
Eitzen I, Hakestad KA, Risberg MA. 2012. Inter- and intrarater reliability of isokinetic
thigh muscle strength tests in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. Archives of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 93:420–427 DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.001.
Fiorilli G, Iuliano E, Aquino G, Campanella E, Tsopani D, Di Costanzo A, Calcagno G,
Di Cagno A. 2017. Different consecutive training protocols to design an intervention
program for overweight youth: a controlled study. Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and
Obesity 10:37–45 DOI 10.2147/DMSO.S122110.
Fleury AM, Silva AC da, Pochini A, Ejnisman B, de Lira CAB de, Andrade M
dos S. 2011. Isokinetic muscle assessment after treatment of pectoralis major
muscle rupture using surgical or non-surgical procedures. Clinics 66:313–320
DOI 10.1590/S1807-59322011000200022.
Foster C, Florhaug JA, Franklin J, Gottschall L, Hrovatin LA, Parker S, Doleshal P,
Dodge C. 2001. A new approach to monitoring exercise training. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research 15:109–115 DOI 10.1519/00124278-200102000-00019.
Granata KP, Abel MF, Damiano DL. 2000. Joint angular velocity in spastic gait and
the influence of muscle–tendon lengthening. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.
American Volume 82:174–186 DOI 10.2106/00004623-200002000-00003.
Ho SS, Radavelli-Bagatini S, Dhaliwal SS, Hills AP, Pal S. 2012. Resistance aerobic, and
combination training on vascular function in overweight and obese adults. The
Journal of Clinical Hypertension 14:848–854 DOI 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00700.x.
Howley ET. 2007. VO2max and the plateau-needed or not? Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise 39:101–102 DOI 10.1249/mss.0b013e31802dc897.
Jago R, Jonker ML, Missaghian M, Baranowski T. 2006. Effect of 4 weeks of Pi-
lates on the body composition of young girls. Preventive Medicine 42:177–180
DOI 10.1016/j.ypmed.2005.11.010.
Jeon KJ, Lee O, Kim H-K, Han SN. 2011. Comparison of the dietary intake and clinical
characteristics of obese and normal weight adults. Nutrition Research and Practice
5:329–336 DOI 10.4162/nrp.2011.5.4.329.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 23/26
Kü¸
cük¸
cakı N, Altan L, Korkmaz N. 2013. Effects of Pilates exercises on pain, functional
status and quality of life in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Journal of
Bodywork and Movement Therapies 17:204–211 DOI 10.1016/j.jbmt.2012.07.003.
Lee D-C, Sui X, Artero EG, Lee I-M, Church TS, McAuley PA, Stanford FC, Kohl
HW, Blair SN. 2011. Long-term effects of changes in cardiorespiratory fit-
ness and body mass index on all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality
in men: the aerobics center longitudinal study. Circulation 124:2483–2490
DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.038422.
Lessen D. 2014. The PMA pilates certification exam (study guide). North Bay Village:
Pilates Method Alliance.
Mabire L, Mani R, Liu L, Mulligan H, Baxter D. 2017. The influence of age, sex and
body mass index on the effectiveness of brisk walking for obesity management in
adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Physical Activity and Health
14:389–407 DOI 10.1123/jpah.2016-0064.
Many G, Hurtado M-E, Tanner C, Houmard J, Gordish-Dressman H, Park J-J,
Uwaifo G, Kraus W, Hagberg J, Hoffman E. 2013. Moderate-intensity aerobic
training program improves insulin sensitivity and inflammatory markers in a
pilot study of morbidly obese minority teens. Pediatric Exercise Science 25:12–26
DOI 10.1123/pes.25.1.12.
Mascarin NC, Vancini RL, Lira CAB, Andrade MS. 2015. Stretch-induced reductions in
throwing performance are attenuated by warm-up before exercise. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research 29:1393–1398 DOI 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000752.
McQueen MA. 2009. Exercise aspects of obesity treatment. The Ochsner Journal
9:140–143.
Miller SL, Wolfe RR. 2008. The danger of weight loss in the elderly. Journal of Nutrition,
Health & Aging 12:487–491 DOI 10.1007/BF02982710.
Muscolino JE, Cipriani S. 2004. Pilates and the powerhouse—I. Journal of Bodywork and
Movement Therapies 8:15–24 DOI 10.1016/S1360-8592(03)00057-3.
Noble BJ, Borg GA, Jacobs I, Ceci R, Kaiser P. 1983. A category-ratio perceived exertion
scale: relationship to blood and muscle lactates and heart rate. Medicine and Science
in Sports and Exercise 15:523–528 DOI 10.1249/00005768-198315060-00015.
Pedersen BK, Saltin B. 2015. Exercise as medicine—evidence for prescribing exercise as
therapy in 26 different chronic diseases. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science
in Sports 25:1–72 DOI 10.1111/sms.12581.
Penelope L. 2002. Updating the principles of the Pilates method—Part 2. Journal of
Bodywork and Movement Therapies 6:94–101 DOI 10.1054/jbmt.2002.0289.
Pescatello LS, Arena A, Riebe D, Thompson PD. 2014. ACSM’s guidelines for exercise
testing and prescription. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins Health.
Reidpath DD, Cheah JC-H, Lam F-C, Yasin S, Soyiri I, Allotey P. 2013. Validity of
self-measured waist and hip circumferences: results from a community study in
Malaysia. Nutrition Journal 12:Article 135 DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-12-135.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 24/26
Rogers K, Gibson AL. 2009. Eight-week traditional mat Pilates training-program effects
on adult fitness characteristics. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 80:569–574
DOI 10.1080/02701367.2009.10599595.
Ross R, Dagnone D, Jones PJ, Smith H, Paddags A, Hudson R, Janssen I. 2000. Re-
duction in obesity and related comorbid conditions after diet-induced weight loss
or exercise-induced weight loss in men. A randomized, controlled trial. Annals of
Internal Medicine 133:92–103.
Ross R, Janssen I. 1999. Is abdominal fat preferentially reduced in response to exercise-
induced weight loss? Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 31:S568–S572
DOI 10.1097/00005768-199911001-00014.
Ross SE, Flynn JI, Pate RR. 2016. What is really causing the obesity epidemic? A
review of reviews in children and adults. Journal of Sports Sciences 34:1148–1153
DOI 10.1080/02640414.2015.1093650.
Ruffino JS, Songsorn P, Haggett M, Edmonds D, Robinson AM, Thompson D,
Vollaard NBJ. 2017. A comparison of the health benefits of reduced-exertion
high-intensity interval training (REHIT) and moderate-intensity walking in type
2 diabetes patients. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 42:202–208
DOI 10.1139/apnm-2016-0497.
Santangelo KS, Radakovich LB, Fouts J, Foster MT. 2016. Pathophysiology of obesity on
knee joint homeostasis: contributions of the infrapatellar fat pad. Hormone Molecular
Biology and Clinical Investigation 26:97–108 DOI 10.1515/hmbci-2015-0067.
Sarti MA, Monfort M, Fuster MA, Villaplana LA. 1996. Muscle activity in upper and
lower rectus abdominus during abdominal exercises. Archives of Physical Medicine
and Rehabilitation 77:1293–1297 DOI 10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90195-1.
Şavkin R, Aslan UB. 2017. The effect of Pilates exercise on body composition in seden-
tary overweight and obese women. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness
57:1464–1470 DOI 10.23736/S0022-4707.16.06465-3.
Segal NA, Hein J, Basford JR. 2004. The effects of Pilates training on flexibility and body
composition: an observational study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
85:1977–1981 DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.01.036.
Shinkai S, Watanabe S, Kurokawa Y, Torii J, Asai H, Shephard RJ. 1994. Effects of
12 weeks of aerobic exercise plus dietary restriction on body composition, resting
energy expenditure and aerobic fitness in mildly obese middle-aged women.
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology 68:258–265
DOI 10.1007/BF00376775.
Siler B, Turlington C. 2000. The pilates body: the ultimate at-home guide to strengthening,
lengthening and toning your body—without machines. New York: Harmony.
Sparling PB, Millard-Stafford M, Snow TK. 1997. Development of a cadence curl-
up test for college students. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 68:309–316
DOI 10.1080/02701367.1997.10608012.
Tremmel M, Gerdtham U-G, Nilsson P, Saha S. 2017. Economic burden of obesity: a
systematic literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health 14:Article 435 DOI 10.3390/ijerph14040435.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 25/26
Wells KF, Dillon EK. 1952. The sit and reach—a test of back and leg flexibility. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 23:115–118 DOI 10.1080/10671188.1952.10761965.
Weltman A. 1995. The blood lactate responses to exercise. Illinois: Human Kinetics.
West SG, Duan N, Pequegnat W, Gaist P, Des Jarlais DC, Holtgrave D, Szapoc-
znik J, Fishbein M, Rapkin B, Clatts M, Mullen PD. 2008. Alternatives to the
randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Public Health 98:1359–1366
DOI 10.2105/AJPH.2007.124446.
Whipp BJ, Ward SA, Wasserman K. 1986. Respiratory markers of the anaerobic
threshold. Advances in Cardiology 35:47–64 DOI 10.1159/000413438.
Wing RR. 1999. Physical activity in the treatment of the adulthood overweight and
obesity: current evidence and research issues. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise 31:S547–S552 DOI 10.1097/00005768-199911001-00010.
World Health Organization. 2012. Physical activity. Health topics. Available at http:
// www.who.int/ topics/ physical_activity/ en/ .
World Health Organization. 2015. Obesity and overweight. Geneva: WHO. Available at
http:// www.who.int/ mediacentre/ factsheets/ fs311/ en/ index.html .
Xiao T, Fu Y-F. 2015. Resistance training vs. aerobic training and role of other factors on
the exercise effects on visceral fat. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological
Sciences 19:1779–1784.
Rayes et al. (2019), PeerJ, DOI 10.7717/peerj.6022 26/26
