Effects of Different Physical Exercise Programs on the Anthropometric, Cardiovascular, Metabolic, and Strength Variables of Elderly Participating in Health Care Programs
Authors: Sampaio Aristéia , Braga Altemir , Bezerra Jader , Castro Antônio , Gonçalves Luis Carlos , Magalhães-Neto Aníbal , Fidale Thiago , Bortolini Miguel , Silva Romeu 
Published: January 2024

OBJECTIVE: Analyzing the effects of different physical exercise programs on the anthropometric, cardiovascular, metabolic, and strength variables of the elderly participating in health care programs. METHODS: Controlled clinical trial, with 60 elderly participants from health care groups, allocated into four groups: Group of resistance exercises in open-air gyms &ndash; GT1 (n = 17); Group of aerobic and localized exercises - GT2 (n = 11); Group of resistance exercises at GT3 gym (n = 17); Control group: non-exercise practitioners - CG (n = 15). Anthropometric (BMI, % body fat, and waist circumference), cardiovascular (SBP, DBP, HR, and DP), metabolic (total cholesterol, triglycerides, and glycemia), and strength variables were evaluated before and after 16 weeks of intervention. Descriptive statistics, Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test, equal variance test, T-Student test, non-parametric Mann-Witney test, ANOVA One Way, multivariate data analysis using data mining and machine learning techniques, Pearson and Spearman correlation tests, Classical Clustering (Agglomerative Hierarchical Method); Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Z score, Fruchterman-Reingold algorithm, Euclidian Similarity Index and, Cohen&rsquo;s equations were applied. RESULTS: To observe effect size, morphofunctional variables for the GT1 group show a small effect for fat percentage, WHR, and ULS and a medium effect for LLS. For the GT2 group, there was a small effect for fat percentage, WHR, and ULS and a large effect for LLS. For the GT3 group, there was a small effect for the percentage of fat and HC, a medium effect for ULS, and a large effect for LLS. A small effect for glycemia in GT1, a medium effect for glycemia and triglycerides for GT2, a small effect for total cholesterol for GT3, and a large effect for glycemia in CG, with this effect being an increase in this analyte. For the cardiovascular variables, there is a small effect for SBP and HR in GT1, a small effect for DBP, HR, and DP, and a large effect for SBP in GT2, a small effect for SBP, DBP, and HR in GT3 and small effects for SBP and HR in CG. The correlation between BMI (P = 0.0007) and Body Fat% (P = 0.007) with ULS. The variables TG, LLS, and ULS were the ones that differed most in each type of stimulus chosen as an intervention in the present study. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that GT2 caused more significant percentage reductions in body mass and BMI. However, GT3 caused greater fat percentage reduction. The GT2 caused the greatest decrease in waist circumference, while the GT3 caused the largest decline in hip circumference. The three groups induced an increase in strength (ULS and LLS). However, in ascending order, GT1 caused the smallest increase, GT2 an intermediate increase, and GT3 the greatest increase in strength, with considerable effects in GT2 and GT3. Finally, GT2 caused a greater percentage reduction in systolic blood pressure (large effect) and double product (small effect) than the other groups. The three methods proved to be efficient, but with particularities that may reflect the choice of one over another due to health conditions, objectives to be achieved, or characteristics of the patient at the time of their choice by the prescriber.