Int J Sports Med 2011; 32(10): 776-780
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1277214
Training & Testing

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Concurrent Training and Pulmonary Function in Smokers

I. Shaw1 , B. S. Shaw2 , G. A. Brown3
  • 1Monash South Africa, Office of the Deputy Pro Vice-Chancellor, Ruimsig, South Africa
  • 2Tshwane University of Technology, Department of Sport, Rehabilitation and Dental Sciences, Pretoria, South Africa
  • 3University of Nebraska at Kearney, Human Performance Laboratory, HPERLS Department, Kearney, United States
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

accepted after revision April 14, 2011

Publikationsdatum:
26. Mai 2011 (online)

Preview

Abstract

This study compared the effects of aerobic, resistance and concurrent aerobic and resistance training on pulmonary function and cardiorespiratory endurance in at-risk smokers. 50 sedentary, male smokers with pulmonary function impairments at risk for developing chronic lung diseases were randomly assigned to an aerobic (AerG;n=12), resistance (ResG;n=13), concurrent (ConG;n=13) or non-exercising control (NexG;n=12) group for 16 weeks. AerG subjects performed 45 min of aerobic exercise at 60%HRmax, ResG subjects performed 8 resistance exercises at 60%1-RM for 3 sets, 15 repetitions while ConG subjects performed both aerobic and resistance exercises. ANOVA revealed no significant difference between the groups in their pre-/post-test changes for FEV1/FVC ratio (AerG:−4.13%; ResG:−2.13%; ConG:−0.56%); FEF-50 (AerG:−4.59%; ResG:−7.62%; ConG:5.76%), FEF-75 (AerG:−2.36%; ResG:−7.62%; ConG:10.71%) and FEF 25–75 (AerG:−3.53%; ResG:−6.43%; ConG:7.63%). Significant differences were found between the groups in their pre-/post-test changes for FVC (AerG:8.05%; ResG:7.22%; ConG:11.55%), FEV1 (Aer:9.60%;ResG:5.13%; ConG:12.10%), PEF (AerG: 11.29%; ResG:7.49%; ConG:20.18%), PIF (AerG:24.80%; ResG:19.41%; ConG:28.15%), IVC (AerG: 9.04%; ResG: 6.21%; ConG:16.35%), FEF-25 (AerG:5.88%; ResG:5.37%; ConG:11.88%) and cardiorespiratory fitness (AerG:25.44%; ResG:11.59%; ConG:22.83%). Post-hoc analysis revealed concurrent and aerobic training were equally effective at improving PIF and cardiorespiratory fitness with concurrent training most effective at improving FVC, FEV1, PEF, IVC and FEF-25. This suggests synergy between aerobic and resistance exercise in preventing or reducing the detrimental effects of smoking while gaining the unique benefits of each mode of exercise.

References

Correspondence

Prof. Brandon S. ShawPhD 

Tshwane University of

Technology

Department of Sport,

Rehabilitation and Dental

Sciences

Pvt. Bag X680

0001 Pretoria

South Africa

Telefon: +27/73/664 00 22

Fax: + 27/086/612 89 08

eMail: shawbs@tut.ac.za