sports
Article
Bodyweight and Combined Training Reduce Chronic
Low-Grade Inflammation and Improve Functional Fitness
of Postmenopausal Women
Marcos Raphael Pereira Monteiro 1,2,† , José Carlos Aragão-Santos 3,† , Alan Bruno Silva Vasconcelos 1 ,
Antônio Gomes de Resende-Neto 3 , Leury Max da Silva Chaves 1 , Alan Pantoja Cardoso 4 ,
Albernon Costa Nogueira 4 , Angel Carnero-Diaz 5,6 , Pablo Jorge Marcos-Pardo 7,8 , Cristiane Bani Corrêa 1,3 ,
Tatiana Rodrigues de Moura 3 and Marzo Edir Da Silva-Grigoletto 1,3,4,8, *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
*
†
Citation: Monteiro, M.R.P.;
Aragão-Santos, J.C.; Vasconcelos,
A.B.S.; Resende-Neto, A.G.d.;
Chaves, L.M.d.S.; Cardoso, A.P.;
Nogueira, A.C.; Carnero-Diaz, A.;
Marcos-Pardo, P.J.; Corrêa, C.B.; et al.
Bodyweight and Combined Training
Reduce Chronic Low-Grade
Inflammation and Improve Functional
Fitness of Postmenopausal Women.
Sports 2022, 10, 143. https://doi.org/
10.3390/sports10100143
Academic Editor: Brendan O’Brien
Department of Physiology, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju 49100-000, Brazil
Department of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Sergipe, Lagarto 49400-000, Brazil
Department of Medicine, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju 49100-000, Brazil
Department of Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju 49100-000, Brazil
Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain
Centro Universitario San Isidoro, 41092 Seville, Spain
Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain
Active Aging, Exercise and Health/HEALTHY-AGE Network, Consejo Superior de Deportes (CSD),
Ministry of Culture and Sport of Spain, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Correspondence: medg@ufs.br
These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship.
Abstract: Exercise is an important tool against the deleterious effects of aging. Among the possibilities
of exercise, bodyweight training (BWT) has been highlighted in the last years as a safe option to improve the health of older people. We compared the effects of 24 weeks of BWT and combined training
(CT) on low-grade systematic inflammation and functional fitness in postmenopausal women. For
this, 40 women were allocated and submitted to CT (n = 20, 64.43 ± 3.13 years, 29.56 ± 4.80 kg/m2 )
and BWT (n = 20, 65.10 ± 4.86 years, 28.76 ± 4.26 kg/m2 ). We measured inflammation by the
interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-10 (IL-10), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) assessments. For
functional fitness, we used tests similar to activities of daily living. At the end of the 16 weeks,
data from 24 women were analyzed, CT (n = 14) and BT (n = 10). Both groups reduced TNF-α and
IL-6 levels, without differences in IL-10. Regarding functional fitness, both groups demonstrated
improvements in all tests after 24 weeks, except for rise from prone position and the 400-meter
walk test for CT. In summary, CT and BWT are effective in reducing the plasma concentration of
pro-inflammatory cytokines and improving functional fitness in postmenopausal women.
Received: 29 July 2022
Accepted: 30 August 2022
Keywords: aging; activities of daily living; inflammation; physical exercise
Published: 23 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
1. Introduction
iations.
Aging, associated with physical inactivity, causes a deleterious process that involves
a reduction in functionality, closely related to the capacity to make activities of daily
living and alteration in inflammatory factors, associated with the development of chronic
diseases [1,2]. In this view, physical exercise has been presented as one of the main tools
to combat this deleterious process [3,4]. In particular, for the female public, this process is
increased by menopause, characterized by the clinical status after the cessation of menses
for 12 months, defining the final menstrual period [5]. Amongst its various beneficial
effects, physical exercise can reduce pro-inflammatory markers, such as interleukin 6 (IL-6)
and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) [6].
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sports 2022, 10, 143. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports10100143
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sports
Sports 2022, 10, 143
2 of 13
Among the different types of physical exercise recommended for older people, we can
highlight the combined training (CT). This kind of training uses strength training simultaneously with endurance training in the same session, aiming to promote improvements in the
cardiorespiratory and neuromuscular systems [4]. In addition, it requires an infrastructure
prepared with weight machines to perform the training, especially resistance exercises. This
type of training can be applied in different ways, changing the order between aerobic and
resistance exercises, therefore, promoting an interference effect between both or not [7]. In
this sense, the scientific literature shows effects of CT on muscle strength, body composition,
and inflammatory aspects in older women [8–10]. Furthermore, CT principles are aligned
with the requirements of the current literature to promote multisystemic adaptations in
aging, improving the ability to perform activities of daily living [1,3].
On the other hand, the bodyweight training (BWT) emerged as an alternative training
method that allows the use of exercises without implements to promote health in aging.
The characteristics of this method are the realization of physical exercises using body
weight as only overload with no or few implements [11], being a safe option for older
women [12–14]. This training method uses basic movement patterns, such as squat, pull,
and push, similarly to the activities of daily living and promoting gains in coordination, an
important factor in preventing falls in older people [15,16]. The BWT also stimulate strength
and cardiorespiratory capacity [12]. In this regard, it is pertinent to investigate whether
training without external overload would have similar or superior effects to training that
uses implements in variables related to inflammatory aspects and activities of daily living.
Thus, our main goal was to analyze the effects of 24 weeks of bodyweight training,
compared to combined training on measures of inflammatory cytokines and functional
fitness in postmenopausal women. Our initial hypothesis was that bodyweight training
would promote benefits similar to those found with combined training on functional fitness
and inflammatory cytokines in postmenopausal women, submitted to a period of 24 weeks
of training.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Design
This was a longitudinal study in which 24 postmenopausal women were allocated to
CT or BWT (independent variables) and underwent two weeks of familiarization and
24 weeks of training. After this, they evaluated the effects of such interventions on
functional fitness and inflammation (dependent variables). For this, three evaluations
Sports 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEWwere made: pre-familiarization (E0), pre-intervention (E1), after 12 weeks (E2), and
3 of af14
ter 24 weeks of intervention (E3) (Figure 1). At E0, we calculated the reproducibility
of measures.
Figure 1.1.Experimental
study
design.
E0: Evaluation
pre-familiarization.
E1: Evaluation
pre-intervention.
Experimental
study
design.
E0: Evaluation
pre-familiarization.
E1: Evaluation
preintervention.
Evaluation
12 weeks. after
E3: Evaluation
after square:
24 weeks.
Black square:
functional
E2:
EvaluationE2:
after
12 weeks. after
E3: Evaluation
24 weeks. Black
functional
fitness evaluation.
fitnesstriangle:
evaluation.
Black triangle:
pro-inflammatory
Black
pro-inflammatory
cytokines
evaluation. cytokines evaluation.
2.2. Subjects
Through publicity around the university and social media, we have been able to
attract the interest of 50 postmenopausal women. Ten were excluded for not meeting the
inclusion criteria, which were: being female, being sedentary according to the Physical
Activity Questionnaire [17], not having menstrual bleeding in the last 12 months, not
having cognitive disorders that compromise the understanding of the instructions and
procedures, and not having a history of heart attack, uncontrolled high blood pressure, or
Sports 2022, 10, 143
Figure 1. Experimental study design. E0: Evaluation pre-familiarization. E1: Evaluation preintervention. E2: Evaluation after 12 weeks. E3: Evaluation after 24 weeks. Black square: functional
fitness evaluation. Black triangle: pro-inflammatory cytokines evaluation.
3 of 13
2.2. Subjects
Through publicity around the university and social media, we have been able to
2.2. Subjects
attract the interest of 50 postmenopausal women. Ten were excluded for not meeting the
Through publicity around the university and social media, we have been able to
inclusion criteria, which were: being female, being sedentary according to the Physical
attract the interest of 50 postmenopausal women. Ten were excluded for not meeting the
Activity Questionnaire [17], not having menstrual bleeding in the last 12 months, not
inclusion criteria, which were: being female, being sedentary according to the Physical
having cognitive disorders that compromise the understanding of the instructions and
Activity Questionnaire [17], not having menstrual bleeding in the last 12 months, not
procedures, and not having a history of heart attack, uncontrolled high blood pressure, or
having cognitive disorders that compromise the understanding of the instructions and
medical contraindication for physical exercise.
procedures, and not having a history of heart attack, uncontrolled high blood pressure, or
Thus,
our sample was
in a part design, with parts of size three to
medical
contraindication
for randomized
physical exercise.
distribute
equally
40
active
older
women
according
their
lower
limb
power
in the
Thus, our sample was randomized in a part
design,to
with
parts
of size
three
to distribute
following
CT (n
= 20) or
BWT (n =to20).
We
organized
the data
from
the bestgroups:
to the
equally 40groups:
active older
women
according
their
lower
limb power
in the
following
worst
value
and
made
the
distribution
of
the
groups
in
the
same
direction.
An
CT (n = 20) or BWT (n = 20). We organized the data from the best to the worst value and
independent
researcher
performed
the
allocation
procedures.
The
purpose
of
this
type
of
made the distribution of the groups in the same direction. An independent researcher
distribution
was
to
guarantee
the
homogeneity
of
the
groups.
The
exclusion
criteria
performed the allocation procedures. The purpose of this type of distribution was to
adopted
were:
attendance
below
85%The
or not
being present
any of the
evaluation
guarantee
the having
homogeneity
of the
groups.
exclusion
criteriaatadopted
were:
having
moments
(Figure
attendance
below2).
85% or not being present at any of the evaluation moments (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Flow diagram.
We asked the participants to maintain their usual activities, not to perform any other
exercise program, and not to change their eating habits. We informed the participants
about all the possible risks and benefits derived from the study. In case of an agreement,
we asked them to sign an informed consent form. This study was conducted following
the Declaration of Helsinki for studies with human subjects, approved by the Ethical
Research Committee of the Federal University of Sergipe (CAAE: 96105118.6.0000.5546),
and registered in the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBEC) as RBR-89KCHG.
2.3. Intervention
Both experimental groups (CT and BWT) underwent two weeks of familiarization
and 72 training sessions. The sessions lasted an average of 45 min, three times a week,
on non-consecutive days (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) between 6 and 7 am, in the
sports gymnasium of the institution, conducted by physical education professionals with
two years previous experience. Each training session was divided into four parts, with
Sports 2022, 10, 143
4 of 13
two similar parts in both groups: Part 1, at the beginning of the session, which consists of
five minutes of mobility for the main joints of the body (cervical, shoulder, hip, and ankle)
and a global warm-up of ten free squats and ten jumping jacks; and Part 4, at the end of the
training session, which consists of five minutes of intermittent running.
Parts 2 and 3 presented different exercises according to the specificity of each group.
The CT group performed exercises commonly used in weight rooms. In Part 2, CT executed
12 min of continuous walking with a change of direction, developing cardiovascular
endurance and speed. In Part 3, CT performed 16 min of resistance exercises at maximum
concentric speed (variations of supine, leg extension or leg press, rowing, deadlift, lat pull
down, calf raise, shoulder press, and bilateral bridge or stiff), aiming to develop strength
and muscle power for upper and lower limbs in a circuit format. More details regarding
the training are in the Supplementary Material (Table S1).
The BWT group predominantly has used multi-articular exercises specific for daily
activities and executed with the bodyweight as only overload. Specifically, in Part 2, BWT
performed 12 min of intermittent activities that stimulated the components of agility, speed,
motor coordination, balance, and muscle power. In Part 3, BWT performed 16 min of
multi-articular and multiplanar exercises executed at maximum concentric speed (variations of pull up, plank, dynamic quadruped exercise, bridge, lunge, push-up, and goblet
squat), seeking to develop strength and muscle power for the upper and lower limbs and
with high recruitment of the body mid-zone region. Both parts were performed in a circuit
format. More details regarding the training are in the Supplementary Material (Table S2)
The training sessions were collective. All participants were supervised by at least two
professionals specialized in physical training with a previous experience of at least two
years with older people training. This ensured that the protocols were executed properly,
maintaining the safety, efficiency, and motivation of the participants.
Control of the training was performed through a range of maximum repetitions, using
a range of 8 to 12 repetitions [18]. For the CT group, we increase the load by 2% to 5%
for upper limbs exercises, and 5% to 10% for lower limbs exercises to maintain the preestablished range of repetitions when necessary [1]. For the BWT group, when necessary,
we made biomechanical adjustments or increase the complexity of the exercises to maintain
the pre-established range of repetitions [19]. We controlled the effort using the OMNI-GSE
scale [20], keeping Part 2 with a score between 6 and 8, and Part 3 with a score between 7
and 9. In Part 4, we maintained a score between 7 and 8. We carry out increases in exercise
complexity and training density at each training phase (six weeks). The training protocol is
described and available as supplementary material.
2.4. Data Collection
The evaluators were blinded concerning the groups of participants. In all evaluation
moments, the tests were applied by the same evaluators. Physical education professionals
with previous experience of at least two years performed the functional tests in the sports
gymnasium of the institution. In addition, the evaluator provided verbal encouragement
on all performance tests. In the week previously to familiarization, we applied the same
physical tests on three different days (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday). The intraclass
correlation coefficient (ICC) between days was calculated and the values were: hand grip
test (HGT) (r = 0.93); five times sit to stand test (5XSTS) (r = 0.90); stand-up and walk
around the house (SUWAH) (r = 0.94); rise from prone position (RPP) (r = 0.95); gallon-jug
shelf-transfer (GJST) (r = 0.96); test of 400-meter walk (400 MW) (r = 0.94), suggesting
excellent reliability; and dressing on and taking off a t-shirt (DTOT) (r = 0.81), suggesting
good reliability. All the values were >0.7, considered sufficient to determine the reliability
of a test [21].
Nursing professionals with previous experience of at least two years conducted the
blood collection in the university’s physiology laboratory, with the temperature kept at 25◦
and relative humidity of the air kept at 60%. We requested that the sample did not perform
intense exercises in the 120 h before evaluation. We asked the sample to maintain their
Sports 2022, 10, 143
5 of 13
physical activities and nutritional habits throughout all the intervention and evaluation
moments. All participants were instructed to wear comfortable sports clothing at all
collection moments.
2.4.1. Cytokines
For biochemical evaluations, whole blood was collected, and the serum obtained
was kept frozen at −80 ◦ C until thawed for the assessment of the immune mediators.
Cytokine concentrations were assessed by a multiplexed flow cytometry method using
one set of bead-based immunoassays, known as the Human TH1/TH2 CBA cytokine kit II
manufactured by the BD Biosciences® (San Diego, CA, USA). The measurements performed
followed the manufacturer’s protocols, evaluating the following circulating mediators: IL-6,
IL-10, and TNF-α.
Briefly, the lyophilized cytokine standards and the serum samples were processed.
The results were acquired using the BD FACSCalibur flow cytometer, FL4 channel. Three
hundred events were acquired for each cytokine bead used. Data were analyzed using
the FCAP software, version 3.0 (BD Biosciences® , San Diego, CA, USA). Standard curves
for each cytokine were generated using a standard mixture of mediators supplied. The
concentration in each serum was determined by interpolation from the corresponding
standard curve. Whenever a given cytokine was assessed by both kits, the mean value
obtained was considered.
2.4.2. Hand Grip Test
The hand grip test evaluates the handgrip strength, using a hand dynamometer (Hand
Grip Test-Jamar Plus+® , Bolingbrook, IL, USA). The participant realized a familiarization,
followed by three valid five-second attempts, employing maximum voluntary contraction,
executed at normal speed and with a gradual increase in strength. The result was computed
as the average between the highest values obtained on each hand [9].
2.4.3. Five Times Sit to Stand Test
This test evaluates the functionality and, indirectly, the power of lower limbs through
the individual’s ability to sit and get up from a chair. We instructed the subjects to perform
five consecutive movements to sit and get up from a chair, without the help of upper limbs,
as quickly as possible. The punctuation of the test is the time necessary to perform all the
five repetitions, starting the movement at the command (“now”) given by the evaluator.
Three attempts were performed as familiarization. Thirty seconds of rest were given
between each execution. In the end, all attempts were timed and recorded, and finally, the
shortest time was used for analysis [22].
2.4.4. Stand-Up and Walk around the House
The stand-up and walk-around-the-house test (SUWAH) evaluate the agility and
dynamic balance of the individual, using the functional movement of getting up from a
sitting position and walking a certain distance with some changes in direction. Initially, a
chair was positioned with two cones at a distance of four meters backward and three meters
sideways, a cone on each side. The test is characterized by performing a route involving
walking to both cones and returning to the chair twice, in the shortest possible time. Each
participant performed the test three times. Between each execution, the participant had a
recovery of 60 s. We analyzed the shortest time [23,24].
2.4.5. Rise from Prone Position
This test consists in globally evaluating the individual’s autonomy. For this, the
individual is initially positioned in a prone position on a mat on the floor and instructed to
take the bipedal position as quickly as possible as soon as given the command “now”. The
execution of the test is timed and was performed three times. The first of which was for
Sports 2022, 10, 143
6 of 13
familiarization purposes, with a 30-s interval between each execution. The shortest time
achieved was forwarded for further analysis [24].
2.4.6. Dressing on and Taking off a T-Shirt
The purpose of this test is to evaluate the functional autonomy related to the movement
of the upper limbs, involving mobility, speed, and coordination. The subject begins the test
in an orthostatic position, with arms relaxed along the body and a shirt in the dominant
hand. At the command “now” the subject must put on the shirt and immediately remove
it, as quickly as possible, returning to the initial position. A familiarization was performed
followed by two attempts. The participants had thirty seconds of recovery between each
execution. The shortest time was analyzed [24].
2.4.7. Gallon-Jug Shelf-Transfer
The purpose of this test is to evaluate the individual’s physical function globally,
involving aspects of core stability, strength, coordination of upper and lower limbs, and
handgrip strength. The test begins by positioning the subject laterally to a bookcase, with
five bottles positioned side-by-side on the bottom shelf.
We instructed the participant to sequentially transfer five gallons of liquid weighing
about 3.9 kg, from a lower shelf to an upper shelf, as quickly as possible. For this, the
participant needs to perform small squats and trunk rotation to reach the lower shelf and
move all the bottles to the upper shelf. The participant needs to move one bottle at a time
and use both hands. We record the time to complete the task, starting with the command
provided by the evaluator (“now”) and ending with the proper positioning of the last bottle
on the top shelf. Between each attempt, the participant had 60 s of recovery. We instructed
a familiarization trial followed by two attempts recorded. The shortest time was used for
the analyses [25].
2.4.8. Test of 400-Meter Walk
In this test, each subject was instructed to walk 20 laps as fast as possible, without
running, on a previously delimited 20-m course. Only one attempt was made. We record
the time for analysis [26].
2.5. Statistical Analysis
We performed a power analysis to determine the appropriate number of participants
to detect a minimum difference of 10% in IL-6 and TNF-α, with a power of 80%. The
sample required was ten subjects. We expressed the data in descriptive statistics with
mean and standard deviation. In the sample characterization, we used independent test
T for numerical values and the chi-square test for categorical values. Initially, we did a
verification of normality through the Shapiro–Wilk test. The homogeneity of variances was
verified through Levene’s test. After this, we analyzed the data using repeated-measures
analysis of variance (ANOVA), and when p < 0.05, we realized multiple comparisons
with Bonferroni correction; additionally, partial η2 was calculated for the interactions. For
non-normal and heterogeneous data, the Wilcoxon test was used for analysis over time,
and the Mann–Whitney U-test for between-group analysis. In addition, we used Cohen’s
D to measure the effect size of the comparisons performed [27]. All analyses were made
using Jamovi software 2.2.5 [28].
3. Results
Firstly, the sample evaluated in this study presented baseline values with no statistical
differences in their characterization (Table 1); similarly, no statistically significant differences
were found between the groups in the initial moment for any of the outcome variables.
Sports 2022, 10, 143
7 of 13
Table 1. Sample characterization.
Characteristics
Age (years)
Body mass (kg)
Height (m)
BMI (kg/m2 )
WHR
Hypertension
Diabetes
Dyslipidemia
Osteoarthritis
Arthritis
Depression
CT (n = 14)
BWT (n = 10)
Anthropometry (mean and standard deviation)
64.43 ± 3.13
65.10 ± 4.86
71.95 ± 8.36
67.92 ± 10.14
1.57 ± 0.06
1.54 ± 0.06
29.56 ± 4.80
28.76 ± 4.26
0.86 ± 0.10
0.88 ± 0.10
Medical History (relative and absolute frequency)
35.7 (5)
50.0 (5)
7.1 (1)
10.0 (1)
42.9 (6)
50.0 (5)
28.6 (4)
20.0 (2)
21.4 (3)
40.0 (4)
7.1 (1)
40.0 (4)
p Interaction
0.685
0.298
0.258
0.680
0.763
0.484
0.803
0.729
0.633
0.324
0.051
Note: BMI: body mass index. WHR: waist–hip ratio. CT: combined training group. BWT: bodyweight training group.
When analyzing cytokine plasma concentrations (Figure 3), there was no effect in the
groups. However, significant reductions were observed for TNF-α8
concentrations over time for both groups (CT: d = 0.778; BWT: d = 0.944). In turn, for IL-6
concentrations, this difference occurred only for the BWT group (d = 0.400).
Sports 2022, 10, x FOR
PEER REVIEW
comparison
between
(a)
of 14
(b)
(c)
Effects of 24 weeks of combined training (CT) and bodyweight training (BWT) on cytokine
Figure 3. EffectsFigure
of 24 3.weeks
of combined training (CT) and bodyweight training (BWT) on cytokine
concentrations of postmenopausal women. E1: Evaluation pre-intervention; E2: Evaluation after 12
concentrations weeks.
of postmenopausal
women.
E1: Evaluation
pre-intervention;
E2: Evaluation
after
E3: Evaluation after
24 weeks.
* Difference to
the E1 moment: Circle:
Sample values
at E1 of
12 weeks. E3: Evaluation
after
24
weeks.
*
Difference
to
the
E1
moment:
Circle:
Sample
values
at
CT. Square: Sample values at E3 of CT. Triangle: Sample values at E1 of BWT. Inverse triangle:
Sample
values
at E3atofE3
BWT.
(a) Effects
of intervention
on TNF-α;
(b)BWT.
Effects
of intervention
E1 of CT. Square:
Sample
values
of CT.
Triangle:
Sample values
at E1 of
Inverse
triangle:on IL6;
(c)
Effects
of
intervention
on
IL-10.
Sample values at E3 of BWT. (a) Effects of intervention on TNF-α; (b) Effects of intervention on IL-6;
(c) Effects of intervention on IL-10.
Regarding the intervention effects on the functional parameters (Table 2), variance
analysis showed no interaction effect between time and group for any of the variables.
However, regarding time, we could observe that for the HGT, both experimental groups
showed significant improvements between E1 and E3 (CT: d = 0.434; BWT: d = 0.657), and
for the BWT group, there were also differences between E2 and E3 (d = 0.588).
For 5XSTS, both groups showed significant reductions between E1 and E2 (CT: d =
5XSTS (s)
CT
BWT
CT
CT
RPP
BWT(s)
22.46 ± 4.24
34.19 ±±3.41
3.11
33.68
7.75 ± 1.54
21.80 ± 4.72
SportsBWT
2022, 10, 14334.19 ± 3.11
23.96 ± 3.81
24.21 ± 3.82 *
p time < 0.001
(∆ = −15.23%; 3.911])
d3.818])
= 0.749; CI = [0.494;
(∆ = −24.77%; 5.380])
d6.061])
= 1.339; CI = [1.335;
pη²
interaction
= 0.998
parcial = 0.009
± 2.32
*⸸
32.78
±2.99
1.88
31.72
* =Finally,
30.59
3.77CI
* =differences
p time
< 0.001
(∆ = 6.67%;
d
CI
[−3.108;for the(∆400
= 7.79%;
= 0.434;
[−3.242;
p
interaction
=for
0.064
0.515;
BWT:
d= 0.372;
=±0.849).
MW30.84
adsignificant
were
found
the
6.57
1.61 *CI = [−0.798;
5.83
±0.860;
1.32 *⸸
p time < 0.001
d0.108])
= ±0.549;
(∆ == −9.17%;
−9.79%;
d
=
1.221;
CI
=
[0.645;
(∆ = −4.12%;
−5.82%;
0.611;
[0.009;
(∆
d
=
CI
=
[0.802;
p
interaction
0.732
η² parcial = =0.118
BWT group between times E1 and E3 (d = 1.178).−0.258])
22.35
3.91 Finally, for the 400 MW
24.70
± 4.08 *⸸ differences were found for the
0.515; BWT:
d1.858])
=±0.849).
a significant
2.487])
η² parcial = 0.000
30.84
2.32
*⸸
32.78
1.88
(∆ = 2.52%;
d = 0.127;
CI = [−2.448;
= 13.30%;
d and
=±0.657;
CI = [4.660;
Table
2. Effects
of± 24
weeks
of combined(∆
training
(CT)
bodyweight
training (BWT) on
BWT
group
between
E1 and E3
= 1.178).
6.59
±±1.49
* times
5.88
2.50
0.95CI
2.42
±1.30
0.88*CI = [0.645;
p time < 0.001
= −4.12%;
d
= 0.549;
= [−0.798;
(∆(d
= −9.79%;
d = ±1.221;
(∆
functional fitness
in menopausal women.
1.358])
−1.330])
8 of 13
(∆ = −15.18%;
d==0.062;
0.827;CI
CI==[−0.222;
[0.368;
(∆ == −5.49
−24.19%;
d==0.149;
1.421;CI
CI==[−0.209;
[1.210;
−2.34%; d3.818])
(∆
%; d6.061])
p interaction = 0.034
Table 2. Effects
of 24 weeks of combined training (CT)2.574])
and
(BWT)
on= 0.143
E2
E3 bodyweight trainingη²
Analysis
1.982])
6.570.349])
± 1.61
*
5.830.506])
± 1.32 *⸸
p parcial
time < 0.001
functional fitness
in
menopausal
women.
2.60
1.02 CI = [0.494;
2.22
0.97
0.95
2.42
0.88*⸸CI = [1.335;
< 0.001
(∆ = −15.23%;2.50
d =±±0.749;
(∆ = −24.77%;
d =±±1.339;
p9 interaction
= 0.998
ofp time
14
Regarding
the
intervention
effects
on
the
functional
parameters
(Table
2),
variance
31.72
±
2.99
*
30.59
±
3.77
*
p
time
<0.001
0.001
23.96
±
3.81
24.21
±
3.82
*
p
time
<
(∆ == −2.34%;
−9.40%;
0.241;
CI
=
[−0.072;
(∆
=
−22.64%
d
=
0.593;
CI
=
[0.227;
(∆
dd1.858])
== 0.062;
CI
=
[−0.222;
(∆
=
−5.49
%;
d
=
0.149;
CI
=
[−0.209;
p
interaction
0.034
E2
E3
Analysis
2.487])
η² parcial
= =0.000
(∆==6.67%;
−5.82%;
=0.372;
0.611;
[0.009; effect
(∆==between
−9.17%;d d=0.506])
=0.434;
0.860;
=[−3.242;
[0.802;
interaction
=0.064
0.732
analysis
showed
no
interaction
time
and
for any
of
the variables.
(∆
d d=0.349])
CICI
= =[−3.108;
(∆
7.79%;
CICI=group
ppη²
interaction
=0.143
0.604])
1.073])
parcial
=
6.59 ± 1.49 *
5.88 ± 1.30 *
3.911])
5.380])
η²
parcial
=
0.009
0.108])
−0.258])
η²
parcial
=
0.118
However, 23.96
regarding
time,
we
could
observe
that
for
the
HGT,
both
experimental
groups
2.60
±
1.02
2.22
±
0.97
*⸸
± 3.81 CI = [0.368;
24.21
3.82 *CI = [1.210;
p time < 0.001
(∆ = −15.18%; d = 0.827;
(∆ = −24.19%;
d = ±1.421;
30.84
±E3
2.32
*⸸
32.78
1.88
22.35
3.91
*⸸
0.515;
BWT: d
===0.849).
Finally,
for
400 MW abetween
significant
differences
foundBWT:
for
the
showed
significant
improvements
E124.70
and
(CT:
=
0.434;
d
= 0.657),
and
12.39
±±±2.10
*the
12.08
±4.08
2.08
* were
p
time
< 0.001
2.87
±±1.21
(∆
−9.40%;
d1.982])
0.241;
CI
[−0.072;
(∆
0.593;
CI
[0.227;
22.46
4.24
(∆
6.67%;
d
== 0.372;
CI
== [−3.108;
(∆==−22.64%
7.79%;
dd2.574])
==±0.434;
CI
=d=[−3.242;
p interaction
= 0.064
−4.12%;
=
0.549;
CI
=
[−0.798;
(∆
=
−9.79%;
d
=
1.221;
CI
=
[0.645;
34.19
3.11
(∆
21.80
±±4.72
2.52%;
ddd=0.604])
0.127;
CI
=
[−2.448;
13.30%;
d
=
0.657;
CI
=
[4.660;
13.70
2.59
(∆==the
−9.56%;
=
0.556;
CI
=
[0.022;
(∆
=
−11.82%;
d
=
0.690;
CI
=
[0.218;
p
interaction
=
0.728
BWT
group between
times
E1
and
E3
(d
=
1.178).
for
BWT
group,
there
were
also
differences
between
E2
and
E3
(d
=
0.588).
1.073])
0.108])
−0.258])
η² parcial = 0.118
6.061])
3.818])
1.358])
−1.330])
2.611])
3.028])
η²p parcial
= 0.011
22.35
3.91*
24.70
± 4.08
31.72
± ±2.99
30.59
3.77 *⸸
*
time < 0.001
Effects
of
24
weeks
of
combined
training
(CT)
and
bodyweight
training
(BWT)
on
functional
Table
2.weeks
Table
2.
Effects
of
24
of
combined
training
(CT)
and
bodyweight
training
(BWT)
on
12.86
±
1.43
12.08
±
2.06
*
±0.611;
2.10 CI
*CI==[−2.448;
12.08
2.08 *CI
p time < 0.001
21.80 ±±3.41
4.72
(∆ == −5.82%;
2.52%;12.39
dd==0.127;
(∆ == −9.17%;
13.30%;
0.657;
CI == [0.802;
[4.660;
33.68
(∆
[0.009;
(∆
dd==±0.860;
p interaction
= 0.732
fitness
in menopausal
women.
2.50
±1.61
0.95
2.42
±0.690;
0.88
time <<0.001
0.001
functional
menopausal
women.
6.57
*CI
5.83
*⸸CI
pp time
14.10
2.11 fitness
(∆
=in
−8.79%;
d1.358])
=±0.688;
= [−0.291;
(∆ == −11.82%;
−14.32%;
d±==1.32
0.969;
CI ==[0.218;
[0.361; p interaction
13.70
±±2.59
−9.56%;
0.556;
[0.022;
(∆
d−1.330])
0.728
3.911])
5.380])
η² parcial = =0.009
2.56 ±±1.54
1.00
(∆ == −15.23%;
−2.34%; dd2.611])
==0.062;
−5.49 %; dd3.028])
== 0.149;
interaction
=0.998
0.034
7.75
(∆
0.749;CI
CI==[−0.222;
[0.494;
(∆ = −24.77%;
1.339; CI
CI == [−0.209;
[1.335;
ppη²
interaction
=0.011
2.773])
3.685])
parcial
=
30.84
±
2.32
*⸸
32.78
±
1.88
E2
E3
Analysis
E1
E2
E3
Analysis
0.349])
0.506])
η²
parcial
=
0.143
1.858])
2.487])
η²
parcial
=
0.000
1.43CI
12.08
2.06*⸸
*CI = [0.645;
6.57
±±1.61
* = [−0.798;
5.83
1.32
p time < 0.001
d = 0.549;
(∆ = −9.79%;
d =±±1.221;
34.19 ± 3.11
(∆ = −4.12%;12.86
2.60
±1.49
1.02
2.22
±= 0.969;
0.97
*⸸
6.59
±=0.688;
*CICI= =[−0.291;
5.88
1.30
* CI
10.41
±
1.09
9.93
0.74
p time < 0.001
14.10
2.11
(∆
== −8.79%;
d
=
(∆
=
−14.32%;
d
=
=
[0.361;
7.75 ±± 1.54
(∆
−15.23%;
d
0.749;
[0.494;
(∆
=
−24.77%;
d
1.339;
CI
=
[1.335;
p
interaction
= 0.998
6.061])
3.818])
23.96 ± 3.81
24.21 ± 3.82 * 24.21
time < 0.001 p time < 0.001
23.96
± CI
3.81
±
3.82 *CI =p[1.210;
2.87 ±±±1.36
1.21
(∆ == −15.18%;
−9.40%;
=
0.241;
=
[−0.072;
(∆
=
−22.64%
d
=
0.593;
[0.227;
7.77
(∆
=
0.827;
CI
=
[0.368;
(∆
=
−24.19%;
1.421;
10.68
0.80
−2.53%; dd2.773])
0.282;
[−0.265;
(∆
=
−7.02%;
d
=
0.973;
CI
=
[0.330;
p
interaction
= 0.631
3.685])
1.858])
2.487])
η²
parcial
=
± 4.24d = 0.372; CI =(∆[−3.108;
= 6.67%; d = 0.372;
(∆ == [−3.242;
7.79%; d = 0.434;
interaction =0.000
0.064
(∆22.46
= 6.67%;
(∆ = 7.79%; d = 0.434; CI
p interaction = p0.064
0.604])
1.073])
1.982])
2.574])
2
0.808])
1.166])
η²
parcial
=
0.021
CI
= [±±−1.49
3.108;* 0.108])
[−3.242;
−0.258])
ηp parcial
0.118
6.59
± 1.30
* η² parcial = 0.118
2.50
0.95
2.42
0.88
time < =0.001
0.108])
−0.258]) CI =5.88
22.35
± 3.91
24.70
4.08*⸸*⸸
*
10.80
0.76
10.12
±±
0.84
10.41
±±0.827;
1.09
9.93
0.74
p time < 0.001
7.77 ±±1.00
1.36 22.35
(∆ ==±−2.34%;
−15.18%;
[0.368; 24.70
(∆±==4.08
−24.19%;
1.421;
[1.210; p interaction
2.56
(∆
d d= =0.062;
CICI= =[−0.222;
(∆
−5.49
dd=±=0.149;
CICI= =[−0.209;
= 0.034
3.91 (∆
*⸸%;
(∆
=
13.30%;
d
=
0.657;
21.80
±
4.72
=
2.52%;
d
=
0.127;
12.39
±
2.10
*
12.08
±
2.08
*CI == [0.330;
time <<0.001
0.001
31.72
±
2.99
*
30.59
±
3.77
*
pp time
11.11 ±±0.80
0.92
(∆ == −2.53%;
−2.79%; dd0.349])
= 0.282;
0.367; CI
CI == [−0.265;
[−0.323;
(∆ == −7.02%;
−8.91%; dd0.506])
1.124; CI
[0.495;
10.68
(∆
=1.982])
(∆
== 0.973;
p η²
interaction
0.631
2.574])
parcial = =0.143
(∆ = 2.52%; d = 0.127; CI =CI
[−2.448;
(∆ = 13.30%; d = 0.657; CI
CI == [4.660;
[4.660;−1.330])
= [−2.448; 1.358])
13.70 ±±3.41
2.59
(∆ == −5.82%;
−9.56%; dd0.808])
0.556; CI
CI == [0.009;
[0.022;
(∆ = −11.82%;
d1.485])
0.690;CI
CI==[0.802;
[0.218; ppη²
interaction
=0.732
0.728
33.68
(∆
== 0.611;
−9.17%; d1.166])
==0.860;
interaction
=0.021
0.947])
parcial
=
2.60 ± 1.02
1.358])
−1.330]) 2.22 ± 0.97 *⸸
2.611])
3.028])
η²
parcial
=
0.011
3.911])
5.380])
η²
parcial
=
0.009
± 1.61
5.83
1.32
* CI
time << 0.001
10.80
0.76
10.12
±± 2.99
* =* [−0.072;
30.59
±0.84
3.77*⸸
* = [0.227;
pp time
0.001
2.87 ± 1.21
(∆ = −9.40%;31.72
d =6.57
0.241;
CI
(∆ = −22.64%
d =±±0.593;
7.75
± 1.54 (∆ = −2.79%;
(∆
= =−0.367;
15.23%;
d=
0.749;
(∆ =30.84
−d24.77%;
d *⸸
=CI
1.339;
p interaction
= 0.998
12.86
±
1.43
12.08
±
2.06
*
±
2.32
32.78
±
1.88
222.57
38.88
229.78
±
31.55
p
time
=
0.003
11.11
±
0.92
d
CI
=
[−0.323;
(∆
=
−8.91%;
=
1.124;
=
[0.495;
33.68 ± 3.41 6.57(∆± =1.61
−5.82%;
d0.604])
= [0.494;
0.611; 1.858])
CI = [0.009; 5.83(∆
= −9.17%;
= 0.860;
CI =p[0.802;
p interaction
= 0.732
2 parcial = 0.000
*
± 1.32
*⸸CI =d1.073])
time < 0.001
[1.335;
2.487])
η
CI
=
14.10
±
2.11
(∆
=
−8.79%;
d
=
0.688;
CI
=
[−0.291;
(∆
=
−14.32%;
d
=
0.969;
CI
=
[0.361;
==0.549;
−9.79%;
= 1.221;
34.19 ± 3.11
242.92
28.82 (∆(∆==−4.12%;
−8.38%;dd0.947])
0.595;CI
CI==[−0.798;
[2.040;
- 5.41%; d1.485])
0.435; CI = [0.645;
[-5.175;
p η²
interaction
0.283
parcial = =0.009
6.59 ± 1.49 *(∆ = −24.77%; d = 1.339; CI 5.88
± 1.30 * p interaction = 0.998
(∆ = −15.23%; d = 0.749; CI = 3.911])
[0.494;
= 5.380])
[1.335;
2.773])
3.685])
6.061])
3.818])
38.670])
31.460])
η²
parcial
=
0.056
7.77 ± 1.36 1.858])
(∆
=
−
15.18%;
d
=
0.827;
(∆
=
−
24.19%;
d
=
1.421;
30.84
32.78± ±2.10
1.88*
12.39
12.08 ± 2.32
2.08 *⸸
* η² parcial = 0.000
p time < 0.001
2.487])
CI
[0.368;
1.982])
CI
=d[1.210;
2.574])
222.40
23.32
212.40
21.70
* = [0.645;
222.57
±±38.88
229.78
±0.690;
31.55
p time = 0.003
−4.12%;
d ==0.549;
CI
= [−0.798;
−9.79%;
= ±1.221;
CI
34.19 ±±2.59
3.11 6.59
(∆±=1.49
13.70
−9.56%;
0.556;
[0.022;
(∆(∆±==1.30
−11.82%;
[0.218;
p interaction
= 0.728
*
5.88
*
±
1.09
9.93
±
0.74
*⸸
time <<0.001
0.001
2.50
±
0.95
2.42
±
0.88
pp time
239.70 ±±28.82
23.02 (∆ = −7.22%;
d2.611])
=
0.747;
CI
=
[−4.374;
(∆
=
−11.38%;
d
=
1.220;
CI
=
[5.626;
242.92
−8.38%;10.41
0.595;
[2.040;
(∆
=
5.41%;
d
=
0.435;
CI
=
[-5.175;
p
interaction
=0.011
0.283
6.061])
η² pparcial
(∆ = −15.18%; d = 0.827; CI = 3.818])
[0.368;
=3.028])
[1.210;
31.72 ± 2.99 *(∆ = −24.19%; d = 1.421; CI30.59
± 3.77 *
time < =0.001
10.68
0.80
(∆ == −2.34%;
−2.53%; dd38.670])
0.282; CI
CI == [−0.222;
[−0.265;
−7.02%;
d31.672])
0.973;CI
CI==[−0.209;
[0.330;
interaction
=0.034
0.631
2.56 ±±1.00
(∆
== 0.062;
(∆(∆= =−5.49
%; d31.460])
==0.149;
ppη²
interaction
=0.056
38.971])
parcial
=
33.68 ± 3.41 1.982])
(∆
= −5.82%;
−9.17%;
d =*0.860;
p interaction = 0.732
12.86
± 1.43d = 0.611;
± 2.06
2.574]) (∆ =12.08
2parcial
0.808])
1.166])
η²
parcial
=
0.021
0.349])
0.506])
η²
=
0.143
CI
=
[0.009;
3.911])
CI
=
[0.802;
5.380])
η
parcial
=
0.009
222.40
±
23.32
212.40
±
21.70
*
2.50
± 0.95CI = [−0.291;
0.88 CI = [0.361;
p time < 0.001
14.10 ± 2.11
(∆ = −8.79%; d
= 0.688;
(∆ = −14.32%;2.42
d = ±0.969;
30.84
±
2.32*⸸*⸸
*CI = [5.626;
±CI
1.88
10.80
0.76
10.12
0.84
2.60
±±1.02
2.22
0.97
239.70
23.02 (∆
dd2.773])
==32.78
0.747;
(∆
1.220;
2.56 ±± 1.00
(∆ =±= −7.22%;
−2.34%;
0.062;
CI == [−4.374;
[−0.222; 30.59
(∆ ==± −11.38%;
−5.49* %;
dd3.685])
=±=±0.149;
CI = p[−0.209;
p interaction = 0.034
31.72
2.99
*
3.77
time
<
0.001
(∆ = −d
d = CI
1.221;
± 3.11 (∆
(∆dd
===−0.241;
4.12%;CI
d ===0.549;
11.11
0.92
(∆ == −9.40%;
−2.79%;
0.367;
CI
[−0.323;
(∆==−22.64%
−8.91%;
d9.79%;
1.124;
CI
[0.495;
2.8734.19
±±1.21
[−0.072;
(∆
== 0.593;
= [0.227;
38.971])
0.349])
0.506])
η² parcial = 0.143
CI ==31.672])
[0.645;
6.061])
= [−0.798; 3.818])
(∆ = −5.82%; d = 0.611; CI CI
= [0.009;
(∆ = −9.17%; d = 0.860; CI
[0.802;
p interaction = 0.732
0.947])
1.485])
0.604])
1.073])
2.60
±
1.02
2.22
±
0.97
*⸸
10.41
1.09
9.93
±
0.74
*⸸
p time < 0.001
3.911])
5.380])
η² parcial = 0.009
p time < 0.001
2.42
±
0.88 CI = [0.227;
2.50
± 0.95
2.87 ± 1.21
(∆ ==±−2.53%;
−9.40%;
d
=
0.241;
CI
=
[−0.072;
−22.64%
d
=
0.593;
10.68
0.80 32.78
(∆
d
=
0.282;
CI
=
[−0.265;
(∆
=
−7.02%;
d
=
0.973;
CI
=
[0.330;
p
interaction
= 0.631
30.84 ± 2.32(∆
*⸸= −5.49 %; d = 0.149;
1.88 (∆ = −2.34%; d = 0.062;
p interaction
= 0.034
2.56 ± 1.00
222.57
±
38.88
229.78
±
31.55
p
time <=0.001
0.003
12.39
±
2.10
*
12.08
±
2.08
*
p
time
0.604])
1.073])
2
0.808])
1.166])
η²
parcial
=
0.021
(∆ = −9.79%; d = 1.221; CI
CI = [[0.645;
(∆ = −4.12%; d = 0.549; CI =CI[−0.798;
η parcial = 0.143
−0.209; 0.506])
−0.222; 0.349])
242.92
28.82 (∆
(∆ == −9.56%;
−8.38%; dd===[0.556;
0.595; CI
CI == [0.022;
[2.040;
(∆==−11.82%;
- 5.41%;= d
interaction
0.283
13.70 ±±2.59
(∆
d == 0.435;
0.690; CI
CI == [-5.175;
[0.218;
pp interaction
==0.728
2.60
±
1.02
2.22
±
0.97
*
10.80
±
0.76
10.12
±
0.84
*⸸
6.061])
3.818])
38.670])
31.460])
η²
parcial
=
0.056
2.611])
3.028])
η²
parcial
=
0.011
2.87
±
1.21
(∆
=
−
9.40%;
d
=
0.241;
(∆
=
−
22.64%
d
=
0.593;
± 2.10CI
* = [−0.323;
12.08
± 2.08 CI
* = [0.495;
p time < 0.001
11.11 ± 0.92
(∆ = −2.79%;12.39
d = 0.367;
(∆ = −8.91%;
d = 1.124;
CI = [−
0.604])
CI
= [0.227;
1.073])
222.40
23.32CI
212.40
21.70
* = [0.218;
12.86
±±0.072;
1.43
12.08
±±0.690;
2.06
* CI
13.70 ± 2.59 2.50
(∆±=0.95
−9.56%;
d0.947])
= 0.556;
= [0.022;
(∆
=
−11.82%;
d
=
p
interaction
= 0.728
1.485])
2.42 ± 0.88
p time < 0.001
239.70
23.02 (∆
(∆ == −8.79%;
−7.22%; dd=2.611])
= 0.688;
0.747; CI
CI == [−0.291;
[−4.374;
(∆ == −14.32%;
−11.38%; dd3.028])
1.220; CI
CI ==[0.361;
[5.626;
14.10 ±±2.11
(∆
== 0.969;
η²
parcial
=
0.011
12.39 ± 2.10 (∆
* = −5.49 %; d = 0.149; CI =12.08
± 2.08 * p interaction = 0.034
p time < 0.001
(∆ = −2.34%; d = 0.062; CI = [−0.222;
[−0.209;
31.672])
2.773])
3.685])
13.70 ± 2.59 0.349])
(∆12.86
=38.971])
−9.56%;
(∆
=
−
11.82%;
d
=
0.690;
p
interaction
=
0.728
1.43d = 0.556;
12.08
±
2.06
*
222.57
±±38.88
229.78
±
31.55
p
time
=
0.003
0.506])
η² parcial = 0.143
[0.022;CI
2.611])
CI = d
[0.218;
3.028])
η2 parcial = 0.011
14.10 ±±28.82
2.11 2.60
(∆ ±= 1.02
−8.79%;
d ==0.688;
= [−0.291;
(∆±==0.97
=
0.969;
CI
=
[0.361;
242.92
−8.38%; CI
0.595;
[2.040; 2.22
(∆
-−14.32%;
5.41%;
d
=
0.435;
CI
=
[-5.175;
p
interaction
=
0.283
*⸸ 12.08 ± 2.06 *
12.86
± 1.43
10.41
± 1.09
9.933.685])
± 0.74 *⸸
p time < 0.001
2.773])
38.670])
31.460])
η²
parcial
=
0.056
(∆ = −9.40%;
= [−0.072;
(∆ = −22.64% d = 0.593;
[0.227;d = 0.969;
± 2.11d = 0.241; CI(∆
8.79%; d = 0.688;
(∆ CI
= −=14.32%;
10.6814.10
± 0.80
(∆ = −2.53%; d==−0.282;
CI = [−0.265;
(∆ = −7.02%;
d = 0.973;
CI = [0.330;
p interaction = 0.631
CI = [−
CI = [0.361;
3.685])
222.40
± 0.291;
23.32 2.773])
± 21.70
*
0.604])
1.073]) 212.40
0.808])
1.166])
η²pparcial
0.021
± 1.09CI = [−4.374;
9.93
0.74 *⸸CI = [5.626;
time <=0.001
239.70 ± 23.02 (∆ = −7.22%; 10.41
d = 0.747;
(∆ = −11.38%;
d =± 1.220;
10.41
± 1.09
9.93 ±±0.84
0.74 *⸸
*
p time < 0.001
10.80
±
0.76
10.12
10.68 ± 0.80 12.39
(∆ = 2.10
−2.53%;
= 0.282; CI = [−0.265; 12.08
(∆±=2.08
−7.02%;
d = 0.973; CI =p[0.330;
p interaction = 0.631
38.971])
31.672])
* (∆ d=
time < 0.001
± 0.80 (∆ =± −2.79%;
−0.367;
2.53%;CI
d ==0.282;
(∆* = −d
7.02%;
d =CI
0.973;
p interaction = 0.631
11.1110.68
± 0.92
d =0.808])
[−0.323;
(∆ = −8.91%;
= 1.124;
= [0.495;
1.166])
η²
0.021
= [−0.265; 0.808])
η2 parcial
parcial ==0.021
(∆ = −9.56%; d = 0.556; CI CI
= [0.022;
(∆ = −11.82%; d = 0.690; CI == [0.330;
[0.218;1.166])
p interaction = 0.728
0.947])
1.485])
10.80
±
0.76
10.12
±
0.84
*
10.80
±
0.76
10.12
±
0.84
*⸸
2.611])
3.028])
η² parcial = 0.011
11.11
± 0.92 (∆ = −2.79%;
(∆ = −2.79%; CI
d ==0.367;
(∆ = −d
8.91%;
d = CI
1.124;
11.11
± 0.92
[−0.323; 12.08
(∆±=2.06
−8.91%;
= 1.124;
= [0.495;
12.86 ± 1.43 CId == [0.367;
*
−
CI
= [0.495;
1.485])
222.57
± 0.323;
38.88 0.947])
229.78
± 31.55
p time = 0.003
0.947])
1.485])
(∆ = −8.79%; d = 0.688; CI = [−0.291;
(∆ = −14.32%; d = 0.969; CI = [0.361;
242.92 ± 28.82
(∆ = −8.38%; d = 0.595; CI = [2.040;
(∆ = - 5.41%; d = 0.435; CI = [-5.175;
p interaction = 0.283
222.57 ± 38.88
229.78 ± 31.55
p time = 0.003
2.773])
3.685])
38.670])
242.92 ± 28.82
(∆
=
−8.38%;
d = 0.595;
(∆ =229.78
−31.460])
5.41%;
d = 0.435;
pη²interaction
=0.056
0.283
222.57
± 38.88
± 31.55
pparcial
time ==0.003
CI = [2.040;
38.670])
CI
= [−5.175;
31.460])
η2 parcial = 0.056
222.40
±
23.32
212.40
±
21.70
*
242.92 ± 28.82 10.41
(∆ ±= 1.09
−8.38%; d = 0.595; CI = [2.040; 9.93(∆± =0.74
- 5.41%;
d = 0.435; CI = p[-5.175;
p interaction = 0.283
*⸸ 212.40
time < 0.001
23.32
± 21.70CI
* = [5.626;
239.70 ± 23.02 (∆ = −7.22%; d38.670])
=222.40
0.747;±CI
= [−4.374;
(∆ = −11.38%;
d31.460])
= 1.220;
η² parcial = 0.056
± 23.02
= −7.22%; d = 0.747;
(∆CI
=−
(∆239.70
= −2.53%;
d = 0.282; CI(∆
= [−0.265;
(∆ = −7.02%; d = 0.973;
=11.38%;
[0.330; d = 1.220;
p interaction = 0.631
CI38.971])
= [−±4.374;
= 31.672])
[5.626;
31.672])
222.40
23.3238.971])
212.40
± 21.70
* η² parcial = 0.021
0.808])
1.166]) CI
239.70 ± 23.02 10.80
(∆
=± −7.22%;
d = 0.747;
CI = [−4.374;
−11.38%;
d = 1.220;significant
CI = [5.626;
Note:
* Statistically
significant
difference
to(∆the
E1;*⸸ Statistically
difference to the E2 moment;
0.76
10.12
±=0.84
Percentage
change
related to
comparison
to the E1
38.971])
(∆ = −2.79%; d ∆:
= 0.367;
CI = [−0.323;
(∆the
= −8.91%;
d = 1.124;
CImoment;
= 31.672])
[0.495;d: Effect size related to the comparison to the
BWT
7.77
CT (s)
2.56 ± 1.36
1.00
5XSTS
E1
RPP (s)
SUWAH
(s)
HGT
(kg/F)
CT REVIEW
7.75 ± 1.54
2022, 10, x FOR PEER
BWT
2.87E1
1.21
CT
2.56
±±1.00
CT
33.68
±
3.41
CT
22.46
±
4.24
HGT (kg/F)
DTOT
(s)
BWT
7.77 ± 1.36
GT (kg/F)
CT
BWT
XSTS (s)
CT
BWT
BWT
CT
BWT
BWT
CT (s)
SUWAH
DTOT (s)
RPP
(s)
5XSTS
(s)
BWT
CT
BWT
CT
CT (s)
CT
5XSTS
E1
GJST
BWT(s)
HGT
(kg/F)
BWT
CT
BWT
BWT
CT(s)
RPP
CT
22.46
± 4.24
GJST (s)
DTOT
(s)
SUWAH
(s)
BWT
CT
BWT
BWT
CT
21.80 ± 4.72
CT (s)
CT
SUWAH
5XSTS (s)
400BWT
MW (s)
CT
BWT
CT
BWT
BWT
CT
DTOT
7.75 ± (s)
1.54
400 MW
BWT(s)
GJST
(s)
RPP
(s)
BWT
CT
SUWAH
BWT
CT (s)
7.77 ± 1.36
CT(s)
CT
RPP
CT
WAH (s)
CT
BWT
BWT
CT
BWT
BWT
BWT
GJST
33.68 ±(s)
3.41
RPP (s)
400
MW(s)
(s)
DTOT
BWT
CT
CT
BWT
RPP (s)
CT
34.19 ± 3.11
CT (s)
CT
DTOT
BWT
BWT
CT
DTOT
BWT (s)
BWT
400
MW
(s)
2.56 ± 1.00
CT
GJST
(s)
BWT
CT
BWT
TOT (s)
CT
2.87BWT
± 1.21
CT (s)
GJST
GJST (s)
BWT
CT
CT
BWT
13.70 ± 2.59
400 BWT
MW
BWT(s)
BWT
14.10
± 2.11
400 MW
(s)
400 CT
MW (s)
GJST (s)
CT
CT
CT
BWT
BWT
10.68
± 0.80
BWT
11.11 ± 0.92
BWT
E1 moment; CI: Confidence interval for the difference related to the comparison to the E1 moment. HGT: hand
0.947])
1.485])
grip test, 5XSTS: five times sit to stand, SUWAH:
stand-up and walking around the house, RPP: rise from prone
0 MW (s)
position, DTOT: dressing on and taking off a t-shirt, GJST: gallon-jug shelf-transfer, 400 MW: 400-m walk.
CT
242.92 ± 28.82
BWT
239.70 ± 23.02
222.57 ± 38.88
(∆ = −8.38%; d = 0.595; CI = [2.040;
38.670])
222.40 ± 23.32
(∆ = −7.22%; d = 0.747; CI = [−4.374;
38.971])
229.78 ± 31.55
(∆ = - 5.41%; d = 0.435; CI = [-5.175;
31.460])
212.40 ± 21.70 *
(∆ = −11.38%; d = 1.220; CI = [5.626;
31.672])
p time = 0.003
p interaction = 0.283
η² parcial = 0.056
Sports 2022, 10, 143
9 of 13
For 5XSTS, both groups showed significant reductions between E1 and E2 (CT: d = 0.749;
BWT: d = 0.827), maintaining when comparing E1 and E3 (CT: d = 1.339; BWT: d = 1.421);
however, between E2 and E3, only CT showed significant differences (d = 0.503).
Regarding the SUWAH, significant reductions were observed between E1 and E3 for
both groups (CT: d = 0.860; BWT: d = 1.221), but only the CT group showed reductions
between E1 and E2 (d = 0.611), and only BWT between E2 and E3 (d = 0.919). As for RPP,
only the BWT group showed significant reductions between E1 and E3 (d = 0.593) and E2
and E3 (d = 0.382).
For DTOT, only the CT group showed significant reductions between E1 and E2
(d = 0.556), however, both groups showed differences between the moments E1 and E3
(CT: d = 0.690; BWT: d = 0.969). For the GJST, both groups showed significant reductions
between E1 and E3 (CT: d = 0.973; BWT: d = 1.124), and between the moments E2 and E3
(CT: d = 0.515; BWT: d = 0.849). Finally, for the 400 MW a significant differences were found
for the BWT group between times E1 and E3 (d = 1.178).
4. Discussion
The main findings of this article showed that the BWT was able to promote similar
improvements to the CT for postmenopausal women in the period of 24 weeks, for the majority variables of pro-inflammatory cytokines and functional fitness, partially confirming
our initial hypothesis. Furthermore, it was possible to notice that BWT promoted positive
adaptations in more variables analyzed than CT.
Regarding the pro-inflammatory cytokines, both training programs reduced the
plasma concentration of TNF-α, however, only the BWT attenuated the levels of IL-6,
denoting an important anti-inflammatory effect in this population. Possibly, this finding is
related to training-induced changes in body composition. This idea is reinforced by the
findings of Sardeli et al. [29] who suggest that reduced concentrations of pro-inflammatory
cytokines may be closely associated with changes in body composition, especially reduced
fat percentage and increased muscle mass. Although we were unable to verify measures
related to body composition, a limitation of our study, the duration of the study indicates
a good chance that significant adaptations in body composition occurred in addition to
adaptations in strength tests involving body weight.
Despite reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines, both groups have not improved
anti-inflammatory cytokine (IL-10). These findings have also been found in studies investigating other exercise modalities, such as functional training [10] and aerobic training [30].
The physiological explanation is that adaptations for anti-inflammatory cytokines seem
to be dependent on variables other than exercise. Indeed, our findings corroborate
Vasconcelos et al. [10] who reinforced that there were no differences in IL-10 concentration
after 24 weeks of functional or combined training in elderly women. It is important to
know that low-grade systemic inflammation (inflammaging) is related to the onset or
progression of several chronic diseases, such as hypertension and cancer [31], denoting that
both training programs are effective options for health promotion.
Concerning handgrip strength, both protocols improved this variable. It is known
that there is an important decline after 45 years of age and low values in this variable
are associated with mortality and disability [32]. In this perspective, strength training is
shown to be efficient to attenuate the loss of grip strength [33], an outcome also found in the
present study. In CT, exercises performed on machines and with implements require the
stimulation of this capacity. Interestingly, BWT was also able to improve strength values,
even though it presented fewer exercises that required manual grip.
Regarding functionality, both training protocols were able to promote improvements
in lower limb functionality when analyzed through 5XSST and SUWAH. The improvement in 5XSTS values is in agreement with the current literature, such as the studies by
Santos et al. [12] and Aragão-Santos et al. [34], which showed improvements in the performance of this test after BWT and CT programs. This outcome was expected, since both
models of training presented characteristics that would favor task performance, develop-
Sports 2022, 10, 143
10 of 13
ing motor actions similar to those of the tests, as well as the maximum concentric speed
employed in the execution of the exercises [35]. Specifically, for SUWAH, the BWT showed
significant differences not found by the CT. This is possibly due to the specificity provided
by the exercises with body weight, such as the change of direction present in exercises,
providing a more specific transfer for the test.
Also, the participants in CT and BWT had better performances in the DTOT and GJST
tests, denoting improvement in the upper limbs and global functionality. Regarding the
DTOT, this outcome may be associated with the effect of exercise on motor coordination,
agility, and mobility of the upper limbs. Part 1 training, which focuses on preparing muscles
and joints for movement, may have contributed to these positive effects [36] in addition
to the ability of resistance training to increase range of motion [37]. The GJST, on the
other hand, comprises the analysis of muscle strength, agility, and global coordination [25].
Here, we observed positive adaptations after both training protocols, since performing
the exercises at maximum concentric speed favors the increase in muscle power, which
contributes positively to fast task execution [38].
However, only the BWT was able to provide adaptations at the level of anaerobic and
aerobic endurance for the studied population when the 400 MW test was used, corroborating other investigations [39,40]. This adaptation can be explained by the neuromuscular
and metabolic characteristic of the BWT session itself, composed of exercises organized in a
circuit, executed mainly in a closed kinetic chain and at maximum concentric speed, which
has efficient transference to daily living tasks, such as walking [41].
Among the main limitations of our study, we can point out that we did not perform the
intention to treat analysis due to the high sample loss. This can be explained since we have
established strict exclusion criteria related to frequency (85% of attendance) throughout 24
weeks of training, designed to keep the training at least twice a week, following the current
guidelines for physical exercise for seniors [1,3]. Another limitation in our study was the
absence of a control group that did not perform any intervention; however, we consider the
CT as a positive control group, since it has proven efficacy in the literature on the outcomes
analyzed [42,43]. Furthermore, from the ethical perspective of health interventions, we
believe that leaving one group without any intervention would be ethically questionable.
Therefore, we adopted the design used and analyzed the reliability of all tests aiming to
minimize possible confounding factors.
To our best knowledge, the present study is the first evidence showing the effects of
BWT on inflammatory and fitness parameters in postmenopausal women. The interaction of these variables may contribute to expanding the knowledge about the effects of
different training methods on aging. Among our positive points, we can mention the long
intervention time, the strictness of the exclusion criteria, and the promotion of applicable
supplementary material for movement professionals who work with postmenopausal
women. Regarding suggestions for future research, this article provides a detailed basis for
the practical application of the BWT, which could possibly be used as a comparison group
to different populations and in different contexts.
5. Conclusions and Practical Application
Twenty-four weeks of CT and BWT are effective in reducing the plasma concentration
of pro-inflammatory cytokines and improving functional fitness in postmenopausal women.
From a practical point of view, BWT has a low cost and is applicable in different contexts in
reality by movement professionals involved with the aging population. Furthermore, this
article provides a detailed basis for the practical application of two different protocols of
training in a scientific and professional context for postmenopausal women. These protocols
can be alternatives for professionals in the area, can be applied to other populations in
future research, and may contribute to better efficiency of health promotion programs.
Sports 2022, 10, 143
11 of 13
Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https:
//www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/sports10100143/s1, Table S1: Description of the combined training sessions conducted over 24 weeks; Table S2: Description of the bodyweight training sessions
conducted over 24 weeks.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.R.P.M., J.C.A.-S., A.B.S.V., A.G.d.R.-N., P.J.M.-P., C.B.C.,
T.R.d.M. and M.E.D.S.-G.; methodology, L.M.d.S.C., A.P.C. and A.C.N.; formal analysis, M.R.P.M.,
J.C.A.-S., A.P.C., and A.C.-D.; investigation, M.R.P.M., J.C.A.-S., A.B.S.V., L.M.d.S.C. and A.C.N.;
writing—original draft, M.R.P.M. and J.C.A.-S.; writing—review and editing, A.B.S.V., A.G.d.R.-N.,
A.C.-D., P.J.M.-P., C.B.C., T.R.d.M. and M.E.D.S.-G.; supervision, A.C.N., C.B.C. and T.R.d.M.; project
administration A.G.d.R.-N., P.J.M.-P. and M.E.D.S.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded in part by the “Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de
Nível Superior”–Brasil (CAPES)–Finance Code 001.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of Federal University of Sergipe (protocol code
96105118.6.0000.5546) approval date 17/10/2018.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: We thank the Graduate Program in Health Sciences of the Federal University of
Sergipe for the support that made the publication of this manuscript possible. We also thank all the
components of the Functional Training Group from the Federal University of Sergipe (FTG by UFS)
for methodological and technical support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Fragala, M.S.; Cadore, E.L.; Dorgo, S.; Izquierdo, M.; Kraemer, W.J.; Peterson, M.D.; Ryan, E.D. Resistance Training for Older
Adults: Position Statement from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2019, 33, 2019–2052.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Duggal, N.A.; Niemiro, G.; Harridge, S.D.R.; Simpson, R.J.; Lord, J.M. Can Physical Activity Ameliorate Immunosenescence and
Thereby Reduce Age-Related Multi-Morbidity? Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2019, 19, 563–572. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Izquierdo, M.; Merchant, R.A.; Morley, J.E.; Anker, S.D.; Aprahamian, I.; Arai, H.; Aubertin-Leheudre, M.; Bernabei, R.;
Cadore, E.L.; Cesari, M.; et al. International Exercise Recommendations in Older Adults (ICFSR): Expert Consensus Guidelines.
J. Nutr. Health Aging 2021, 25, 824–853. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cadore, E.; Pinto, R.S.; Bottaro, M.; Izquierdo, M. Strength and Endurance Training Prescription in Healthy and Frail Elderly.
Aging Dis. 2014, 5, 183–195. [CrossRef]
Stuenkel, C.A.; Davis, S.R.; Gompel, A.; Lumsden, M.A.; Murad, M.H.; Pinkerton, J.V.; Santen, R.J. Treatment of Symptoms of the
Menopause: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2015, 100, 3975–4011. [CrossRef]
Flynn, M.G.; Markofski, M.M.; Carrillo, A.E. Elevated Inflammatory Status and Increased Risk of Chronic Disease in Chronological
Aging: Inflamm-Aging or Inflamm-Inactivity? Aging Dis. 2019, 10, 147–156. [CrossRef]
Methenitis, S. A Brief Review on Concurrent Training: From Laboratory to the Field. Sports 2018, 6, 127. [CrossRef]
Resende-Neto, A.G.; Oliveira Andrade, B.C.; Cyrino, E.S.; Behm, D.G.; DeSantana, J.M.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Effects of
Functional and Traditional Training in Body Composition and Muscle Strength Components in Older Women: A Randomized
Controlled Trial. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2019, 84, 103902. [CrossRef]
de Resende-Neto, A.G.; Aragão-Santos, J.C.; Oliveira-Andrade, B.C.; Silva Vasconcelos, A.B.; De Sá, C.A.; Aidar, F.J.;
DeSantana, J.M.; Cadore, E.L.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. The Efficacy of Functional and Traditional Exercise on the Body
Composition and Determinants of Physical Fitness of Older Women: A Randomized Crossover Trial. J. Aging Res. 2019,
2019, 5315376. [CrossRef]
Vasconcelos, A.B.S.; de Resende-Neto, A.G.; Nogueira, A.C.; Aragão-Santos, J.C.; Monteiro, M.R.P.; Morais Junior, G.S.;
Avelar, G.G.; Camargo, E.A.; de Toledo Nóbrega, O.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Functional and Traditional Training Improve
Muscle Power and Reduce Proinflammatory Cytokines in Older Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Exp. Gerontol. 2020,
135, 110920. [CrossRef]
Chaves, L.M.D.S.; Santos, G.V.; Teixeira, C.L.S.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Calisthenics and bodyweight exercises: Different
concepts or scientific synonyms? Rev. Bras. Fisiol. Exerc. 2020, 19, 13–15. [CrossRef]
Sports 2022, 10, 143
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
12 of 13
Santos, G.V.; De Resende Neto, A.G.; Chaves, L.M.D.S.; De Jesus, L.C.; Vasconcelos, A.B.S.; Barranco-Ruiz, Y.; Monteiro, M.R.P.;
Bocalini, D.S.; Teixeira, C.V.L.S.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Effects of Bodyweight and Traditional Resistance Training on the
Functionality of Elderly People: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Rev. Bras. Fisiol. Exerc. 2020, 19, 180–191. [CrossRef]
Osuka, Y.; Suzuki, T.; Kim, M.; Kojima, N.; Fujino, K.; Yoshida, Y.; Hirano, H.; Kim, H. Association between Exercise Type and the
Decline in Instrumental Activities of Daily Living in Community-Dwelling Older Women: A 4-Year Prospective Study. Prev. Med.
2018, 112, 23–30. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Watanabe, Y.; Tanimoto, M.; Oba, N.; Sanada, K.; Miyachi, M.; Ishii, N. Effect of Resistance Training Using Bodyweight in the
Elderly: Comparison of Resistance Exercise Movement between Slow and Normal Speed Movement: Exercise Training Using
Bodyweight in Elderly. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2015, 15, 1270–1277. [CrossRef]
Kaya, D.O.; Duzgun, I.; Baltaci, G.; Karacan, S.; Colakoglu, F. Effects of Calisthenics and Pilates Exercises on Coordination and
Proprioception in Adult Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Hum. Kinet. 2012, 21, 235–243. [CrossRef]
James, E.G.; Leveille, S.G.; Hausdorff, J.M.; Barton, B.; Cote, S.; Karabulut, M.; Conatser, P.; Kennedy, D.N.; Tucker, K.L.;
Al Snih, S.; et al. Coordination Impairments Are Associated with Falling among Older Adults. Exp. Aging Res. 2017, 43, 430–439.
[CrossRef]
Cleland, C.; Ferguson, S.; Ellis, G.; Hunter, R.F. Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) for Assessing
Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour of Older Adults in the United Kingdom. BMC Med. Res.
Methodol. 2018, 18, 176. [CrossRef]
Haff, G.; Triplett, N.T. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, 4th ed.; Human Kinectis: Champaign, United States of
America, 2015; ISBN 978-1-71821-086-8.
La Scala Teixeira, C.V.; Evangelista, A.L.; Pereira, P.E.D.A.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E.; Bocalini, D.S.; Behm, D.G. Complexity:
A Novel Load Progression Strategy in Strength Training. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 839. [CrossRef]
Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Validación de la escala de valoración subjetiva del esfuerzo OMNI-GSE para el control de la intensidad
global en sesiones de objetivos múltiples en personas mayores. Kronos Act. Física Salud 2013, 12, 32–40.
Kiss, M.A.P. Avaliação em Educação Física: Aspectos Biológicos e Educacionais; Manole: São Paulo, Brazil, 1987.
Guralnik, J.M.; Simonsick, E.M.; Ferrucci, L.; Glynn, R.J.; Berkman, L.F.; Blazer, D.G.; Scherr, P.A.; Wallace, R.B. A Short Physical
Performance Battery Assessing Lower Extremity Function: Association with Self-Reported Disability and Prediction of Mortality
and Nursing Home Admission. J. Gerontol. 1994, 49, M85–M94. [CrossRef]
Andreotti, R.A.; Okuma, S.S. Validating a Test Battery of Activities of Daily Living for Physically Independent Elderly. Rev. Paul.
Educ. Física 1999, 13, 46–66. [CrossRef]
Martin Dantas, E.H.; Gomes de Souza Vale, R. Protocolo GDLAM de avaliação da autonomia funcional. Fit. Perform. J. 2004,
3, 175–183. [CrossRef]
Signorile, J.F.; Sandler, D.; Ma, F.; Bamel, S.; Stanziano, D.; Smith, W.; Roos, B.A.; Sandals, L. The Gallon-Jug Shelf-Transfer Test:
An Instrument to Evaluate Deteriorating Function in Older Adults. J. Aging Phys. Act. 2007, 15, 56–74. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Vestergaard, S.; Patel, K.V.; Bandinelli, S.; Ferrucci, L.; Guralnik, J.M. Characteristics of 400-Meter Walk Test Performance and
Subsequent Mortality in Older Adults. Rejuvenation Res. 2009, 12, 177–184. [CrossRef]
Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; L. Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988; ISBN 978-0-8058-0283-2.
Şahin, M.; Aybek, E. Jamovi: An Easy to Use Statistical Software for the Social Scientists. Int. J. Assess. Tools Educ. 2019, 6, 670–692.
[CrossRef]
Sardeli, A.V.; Tomeleri, C.M.; Cyrino, E.S.; Fernhall, B.; Cavaglieri, C.R.; Chacon-Mikahil, M.P.T. Effect of Resistance Training on
Inflammatory Markers of Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Exp. Gerontol. 2018, 111, 188–196. [CrossRef]
Campo, R.A.; Light, K.C.; O’Connor, K.; Nakamura, Y.; Lipschitz, D.; LaStayo, P.C.; Pappas, L.M.; Boucher, K.M.; Irwin, M.R.;
Hill, H.R.; et al. Blood Pressure, Salivary Cortisol, and Inflammatory Cytokine Outcomes in Senior Female Cancer Survivors
Enrolled in a Tai Chi Chih Randomized Controlled Trial. J. Cancer Surviv. 2015, 9, 115–125. [CrossRef]
Ferrucci, L.; Fabbri, E. Inflammageing: Chronic Inflammation in Ageing, Cardiovascular Disease, and Frailty. Nat. Rev. Cardiol.
2018, 15, 505–522. [CrossRef]
Bohannon, R.W. Hand-Grip Dynamometry Predicts Future Outcomes in Aging Adults. J. Geriatr. Phys. Ther. 2008, 31, 3–10.
[CrossRef]
Resende-Neto, A.G.; da Silva Resende, M.; Oliveira-Andrade, B.C.; da Silva Chaves, L.M.; Brandão, L.H.A.; Nogueira, A.C.;
Mota, M.M.; DeSantana, J.M.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Functional Training in Comparison to Traditional Training on Physical
Fitness and Quality of Movement in Older Women. Sport Sci. Health 2021, 17, 213–222. [CrossRef]
Aragão-Santos, J.C.; Vasconcelos, A.B.S.; de Resende-Neto, A.G.; Rodrigues, L.S.; de Lima Silva, N.; Da Silva, D.N.;
Schimieguel, D.M.; Correa, C.B.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Functional and Concurrent Training Do Not Impair Immune Function
and Improve Functional Fitness in Postmenopausal Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Exp. Gerontol. 2021, 153, 111504.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cadore, E.L.; Izquierdo, M. Muscle Power Training: A Hallmark for Muscle Function Retaining in Frail Clinical Setting. J. Am.
Med. Dir. Assoc. 2018, 19, 190–192. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Resende-Neto, A.G.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Prescription of the Functional Strength Training for Older People: A Brief Review.
J. Aging Sci. 2019, 7, 210. [CrossRef]
Sports 2022, 10, 143
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
13 of 13
Ribeiro, A.; Carneiro, N.; Nascimento, M.; Gobbo, L.; Schoenfeld, B.J.; Achour Júnior, A.; Gobbi, S.; Oliveira, A.; Cyrino, E. Effects
of Different Resistance Training Frequencies on Flexibility in Older Women. Clin. Interv. Aging 2015, 10, 531. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Byrne, C.; Faure, C.; Keene, D.J.; Lamb, S.E. Ageing, Muscle Power and Physical Function: A Systematic Review and Implications
for Pragmatic Training Interventions. Sports Med. 2016, 46, 1311–1332. [CrossRef]
Resende-Neto, A.G.; Do Nascimento, M.A.; de Sá, C.A.; Ribeiro, A.S.; DeSantana, J.M.; Da Silva-Grigoletto, M.E. Comparison
between Functional and Traditional Training Exercises on Joint Mobility, Determinants of Walking and Muscle Strength in Older
Women. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2019, 59, 1659–1668. [CrossRef]
Marin, L.; Salerno, A.P.; Variani, F. Efeito Do Exercício Calistênico Na Dor e Capacidade Cardiorrespiratória de Idosos Com
Doença Arterial Obstrutiva Periférica. Rev. FisiSenectus 2016, 3, 47–58. [CrossRef]
McRae, G.; Payne, A.; Zelt, J.G.E.; Scribbans, T.D.; Jung, M.E.; Little, J.P.; Gurd, B.J. Extremely Low Volume, Whole-Body
Aerobic–Resistance Training Improves Aerobic Fitness and Muscular Endurance in Females. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2012,
37, 1124–1131. [CrossRef]
Khalafi, M.; Malandish, A.; Rosenkranz, S.K. The Impact of Exercise Training on Inflammatory Markers in Postmenopausal
Women: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Exp. Gerontol. 2021, 150, 111398. [CrossRef]
Hurst, C.; Weston, K.L.; McLaren, S.J.; Weston, M. The Effects of Same-Session Combined Exercise Training on Cardiorespiratory
and Functional Fitness in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2019, 31, 1701–1717.
[CrossRef]