Exercise supervision enhances health and fitness improvements in clinical populations compared with unsupervised or home-based exercise, but effects of supervision type are unknown in healthy employees. Eighty-five Australian university employees (62 females; mean +/- SD 43.2 +/- 9.8 years) were randomized to personal (1:1; SUP, n = 28), nonpersonal (typical gym-based; NPS, n = 28) supervision or unsupervised control (CON, n = 29) exercise groups. Subjects received a 16-week individually tailored, moderate-to-high intensity aerobic and resistance exercise program completed at an onsite exercise facility (SUP and NPS) or without access to a specific exercise facility (CON). Repeated-measures ANOVA analyzed changes to cardiometabolic outcomes. Mean +/- SD increases to VO2peak were greater (p < 0.01) with SUP (+10.4 +/- 11.1%) versus CON (+3.8 +/- 8.9%) but not different to NPS (+8.6 +/- 8.2%). Compared to CON (+1.7 +/- 7.7%), upper-body strength increases were greater with SUP (+12.8 +/- 8.4%; p < 0.001) and NPS (+8.4 +/- 7.3%; p < 0.05). Lower-body strength increases were greater with SUP (+26.3 +/- 12.7%) versus NPS (+15.0 +/- 14.6%; p < 0.05) and CON (+4.1 +/- 12.4%; p < 0.001), and NPS versus CON (p < 0.01). Body fat reductions were greater with SUP (-2.2 +/- 2.2%) versus NPS (-0.6 +/- 1.9%; p < 0.05) and CON (-0.7 +/- 1.9%; p < 0.05). Access to an onsite exercise facility with personal or nonpersonal exercise supervision was important for improving several cardiometabolic outcomes, with greater improvements to lower-body strength and body composition from personal 1:1 exercise supervision.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• DOI
• PubMed
• PDF locator
• publisher