Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Effects of weighted hula-hooping compared to walking on abdominal fat, trunk muscularity, and metabolic parameters in overweight subjects: a randomized controlled study |
Lahelma M, Sadevirta S, Lallukka-Bruck S, Sevastianova K, Mustelin L, Gylling H, Rockette-Wagner B, Kriska AM, Yki-Jarvinen H |
Obesity Facts 2019 Sep;12(4):385-396 |
clinical trial |
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
BACKGROUND: Weighted hula-hoops have gained popularity, but whether they indeed reshape the trunk or have beneficial metabolic effects in overweight subjects is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine effects of hula-hooping and walking matched for energy expenditure on android fat %, trunk muscle mass, and metabolic parameters in a randomized cross-over study. DESIGN: We recruited 55 overweight nondiabetic subjects, who were randomized to hula-hooping (HULA) for 6 weeks using a 1.5 kg weighted hula-hoop followed by walking (WALK) for another 6 weeks or vice versa. The increments in energy expenditure were similar by HULA and WALK. Body composition (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) and metabolic parameters were measured at baseline and after HULA and WALK. The primary endpoint was the change in fat % in the android region. RESULTS: A total of 53 subjects (waist 92 +/- 1 cm, body mass index 28 +/- 1 kg/m2) completed the study. Body weight changed similarly (-0.6 +/- 0.2 versus -0.5 +/- 0.2 kg, nonsignificant HULA versus WALK). During the intervention the subjects hula-hooped on average 12.8 +/- 0.5 min/day and walked 9,986 +/- 376 steps/day. The % fat in the android region decreased significantly by HULA but not by WALK (between-group change p < 0.001). Trunk muscle mass increased more by HULA than by WALK (p < 0.05). Waist circumference decreased more by HULA than by WALK (-3.1 +/- 0.3 cm versus -0.7 +/- 0.4 cm, p < 0.001; HULA versus WALK). WALK but not HULA significantly lowered systolic blood pressure and increased HDL cholesterol while HULA significantly decreased LDL cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Hula-hooping with a weighted hula-hoop can be used to decrease abdominal fat % and increase trunk muscle mass in overweight subjects. Its LDL lowering effect resembles that described for resistance training.
|