Efeitos crônicos do Método Pilates sobre as respostas cardiorrespiratórias e metabólicas em mulheres hipertensas controladas
Data
2021-11-24
Autores
Barbosa, Rodrigo Fernandes [UNIFESP]
Orientadores
Medeiros, Alessandra [UNIFESP]
Tipo
Dissertação de mestrado
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Resumo
O Método Pilates (MP) tem sido citado como uma modalidade de exercício resistido. Seus benefícios são bem estudados no músculo esquelético, mas sua dinâmica de execução e novos achados, demonstram que ele pode possuir um componente cardiorrespiratório muito importante. O principal objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito do MP nas variáveis cardiorrespiratórias e metabólicas em hipertensas controladas. Foram avaliadas 22 hipertensas (51,7 ± 5,9 anos) que participaram de um protocolo de intervenção com o MP em solo e aparelhos, sistema básico, durante 15 semanas (42sessões). Todas as voluntárias assinaram o termo de consentimento livre e esclarecido (TCLE) e nosso estudo foi aprovado pelo comitê de ética em pesquisa da UNIFESP (CAEE: 08830819.1.0000.5505). Todas as variáveis foram avaliadas nos momentos pré e pós intervenção. Foi realizado cálculo amostral Post Hoc (poder=0,987). A análise estatística foi realizada através do Modelo de Equações de Estimações Generalizadas (GEE) e magnitude do efeito através do Cohen’s d. Os resultados obtidos, em média e desvio padrão (M±DP pré vs M±DP pós), e se houve diferença estatística (*), foram: estatura (158,90±4,82 vs 160,11 ± 4,73*), massa corporal 69,28±6,94 vs 68,71±6,97), índice de massa corporal (IMC= 27,44±2,24 vs 26,80 ± 2,47*), circunferência da cintura (CC= 85,43±4,93 vs 83,34±5,33*), circunferência do quadril (CQ= 103,86±5,86 vs 102,01±5,43*), relação cintura-quadril (RCQ= 0,82±0,05 vs 0,81±0,04*), relação cintura-estatura (RCEst= 0,537±0,032 vs 0,520±0,036*), flexibilidade (20,86±9,81 vs 28,37±8,95*), força da mão direita (22,65±3,81 vs 26,02±3,84*), força da mão esquerda (21,34±4,32 vs 25,57±3,22*), glicemia de jejum (100,77±11,08 vs 94,77±10,63*), colesterol total (CT= 222,09±36,26 vs 192,81±33,48*), frações HDL (52,59±10,09 vs 55,54±9,68) e LDL (142,95±36,06 vs 117,37±33,89*), triglicérides (TG= 143,09±47,44 vs 118,63±39,76*) e hemoglobina glicada (HbA1c= 5,72±0,41 vs 5,42±0,43*), pressão inspiratória máxima (PIMax= 43,18±15,19 vs 121,36±24,27*), pressão expiratória máxima (PEMax= 71,36±14,86 vs 136,82±26,17*), ventilação pulmonar minuto no pico (VE= 43,82±9,81 vs 52,07±10,01*), no primeiro limiar (VE LT= 20,29±4,05 vs 26,95±5,63*) e no segundo limiar (VE RC= 33,85±6,12 vs 45,21±7,01*), reserva ventilatória (RV= 52,41±13,36 vs 44,00±11,89*), volume corrente (VC= 1,32±0,25 vs 1,49±0,26*), capacidade vital forçada (CVF= 2,92±0,36 vs 3,05±0,35*), volume expiratório forçado no primeiro segundo (VEF1= 2,37±0,40 vs 2,44±0,33), pico de fluxo expiratório (PFE= 5,77±1,13 vs 6,57±0,88*), razão entre o volume expiratório forçado em % da CVF (FEV1/CVF%= 79,11±7,53 vs 82,47±5,04*), fluxo expiratório médio forçado (FEF 25-75%= 2,34±0,84 vs 2,67±0,85*), frequência cardíaca de repouso (FC= 71,77±10,63 vs 67,64±9,74*), no pico do exercício (FC Max= 146,14±21,40 vs 154,50±16,12*), no 1º limiar ventilatório (FC LT=106,18±18,22 vs 115,95±16,87*) e no 2º limiar ventilatório (FC RC= 136,41±21,09 vs 144,50±20,42*) pressão arterial sistólica de 24 horas (PAS= 124,29±10,61 vs 117,18±6,99*), pressão arterial diastólica de 24 horas (PAD= 80,63±7,42) vs 76,74±6,46*), pressão arterial média (PAM= 100,75±8,62 vs 95,95±5,56*), potência no primeiro limiar ventilatório (Power LT= 38,86±12,33 vs 62,95±12,76*) e no segundo limiar ventilatório (Power RC= 80,62±18,27 vs 104,30±13,36*), consumo máximo de O2 absoluto no pico (VO2= 1232,59±285,36 vs 1352,91±219,68*), no primeiro limiar ventilatório (VO2 LT= 764,36±152,96 vs 951,09±169,72*) e no segundo limiar ventilatório (VO2 RC= 1068,45±205,09 vs 1296,05±224,71*), consumo máximo de O2 relativo no pico (VO2/kg= 17,94±3,71 vs 19,76±3,11*), no primeiro limiar ventilatório (VO2/Kg LT= 11,23±2,03 vs 13,89±2,16*) e no segundo limiar (VO2R/Kg RC= 16,00±2,95 vs 19,20±3,01*), pressão expirada de O2 (PetO2= 115,09±3,54 vs 117,91±2,87*), pressão expirada de CO2 (PetCO2= 38,00±3,04 vs 35,64±2,58*), equivalente ventilatório para o O2 (VE/VO2= 35,90±4,80 vs 39,85±4,50*), equivalente ventilatório para o CO2 (VE/VCO2= 31,31±3,00 vs 33,77±2,75*), VE/VCO2 slope (27,50±4,17 vs 25,77±3,63*) e OUES (1518,23±360,22 vs 1690,36±378,90*). Concluímos que 15 semanas do MP em solo e equipamentos foi capaz de melhorar a aptidão cardiorrespiratória e metabólica de hipertensas.
The Pilates Method (PM) has been cited as a type of resistance exercise. Its benefits are well studied in skeletal muscle, but its performance dynamics and new findings demonstrate that it may have a very important cardiorespiratory component. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of MP on cardiorespiratory and metabolic variables in controlled hypertensive patients. Twenty-two hypertensive women (51.7 ± 5.9 years) who participated in an intervention protocol with PM on the ground and devices, basic system, for 15 weeks (42 sessions) were evaluated. All volunteers signed an informed consent form (FICF) and our study was approved by the UNIFESP Research Ethics Committee (CAEE: 08830819.1.0000.5505). All variables were evaluated before and after the intervention. Post Hoc sample calculation was performed (power=0.987). Statistical analysis was performed using the Generalized Estimating Equation Model (GEE) and effect magnitude using Cohen's d. The results obtained, in mean and standard deviation (M±SD pre vs M±SD post), and statistical difference (*), were: height (158.90±4.82 vs 160.11±4.73*), body mass 69.28±6.94 vs 68.71±6.97), body mass index (BMI=27.44± 2.24 vs 26.80 ± 2.47*), waist circumference (HC= 85.43±4.93 vs 83.34±5.33*), hip circumference (HC= 103.86±5, 86 vs 102.01±5.43*), waist-hip ratio (WHR= 0.82±0.05 vs 0.81±0.04*), waist-height ratio (WHtR= 0.537±0.032 vs 0.520± 0.036*), flexibility (20.86±9.81 vs 28.37±8.95*), right hand strength (22.65±3.81 vs 26.02±3.84*), hand strength left (21.34±4.32 vs 25.57±3.22*), fasting blood glucose (100.77±11.08 vs 94.77±10.63*), total cholesterol (TC= 222.09 ±36.26 vs 192.81±33.48*), HDL (52.59±10.09 vs 55.54±9.68) and LDL (142.95±36.06 vs 117.37±33) fractions .89*), triglycerides (TG= 143.09±47.44 vs 118.63±39.76*) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c= 5.72±0.41 vs 5.42±0.43*), maximal inspiratory pressure (PIMax= 43.18±15.19 vs 121.36±24.27*), maximal expiratory pressure (PEMax= 71.36±14.86 vs 136.82±26.17*), pulmonary ventilation minute at peak (VE= 43.82±9.81 vs 52.07±10.01*), in the first threshold (VE LT= 20.29±4.05 vs 26.95±5.63*) and in the second threshold (VE RC= 33.85±6.12 vs 45.21±7.01*), ventilatory reserve (RV= 52.41±13.36 vs 44.00±11.89*), tidal volume (VC= 1.32±0.25 vs 1.49 ±0.26*), forced vital capacity (FVC= 2.92±0.36 vs 3.05±0.35*), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1= 2.37±0.40 vs 2, 44±0.33), peak expiratory flow (PEF= 5.77±1.13 vs 6.57±0.88*), ratio between forced expiratory volume in % of FVC (FEV1/FVC%= 79, 11±7.53 vs 82.47±5.04*), mean forced expiratory flow (FEF 25-75%= 2.34±0.84 vs 2.67±0.85*), resting heart rate ( HR= 71.77±10.63 vs 67.64±9.74*), at peak exercise (HR Max= 146.14±21.40 vs 154.50±16.12*), at the 1st ventilatory threshold (HR LT=106.18±18.22 vs 115.95±16.87*) and at the 2nd ventilatory threshold (HR HR=136.41±21.09 vs 144.50±20.42*) systolic blood pressure 24-hour (SBP= 124.29±10.61 vs 117.18±6.99*), 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (DBP= 80.63±7.42) vs 76.74±6.46* ), mean arterial pressure (MAP= 100.75±8.62 vs 95.95±5.56*), power at the first ventilatory threshold (Power LT= 38.86±12.33 vs 62.95±12.76*) and in the second ventilatory threshold (Power RC= 80.62±18.27 vs 104.30±13.36*), maximum consumption of absolute O2 at peak (VO2= 1232.59±285.36 vs 1352.91±219 .68*), in the first ventilatory threshold (VO2 LT= 764.36±152.96 vs 951.09±169.72*) and in the second ventilatory threshold (VO2 RC= 1068.45±205.09 vs 1296.05 ±224.71*), maximum relative consumption of O2 at the peak (VO2/kg= 17.94±3.71 vs 19.76±3.11*), at the first ventilatory threshold (VO2/Kg LT= 11.23 ±2.03 vs 13.89±2.16*) and at the second threshold (VO2R/Kg RC= 16.00±2.95 vs 19.20±3.01*), expired O2 pressure (PetO2= 115 .09±3.54 vs 117.91±2.87*), expired pressure of CO2 (PetCO2= 38.00±3.04 vs 35.64±2.58*), ventilatory equivalent for O2 (VE/ VO2= 35.90±4.80 vs 39.85±4.50*), ventilatory equivalent for CO2 (VE/VCO2= 31.31±3.00 vs 33.77±2.75*), VE/ VCO2 slope (27.50±4.17 vs 25.77±3.63*) and OUES (1518.23±360.22 vs 1690.36±37 8.90*). We conclude that 15 weeks of MP in mat and equipment was able to improve the cardiorespiratory and metabolic fitness of controlled hypertensive patients.
The Pilates Method (PM) has been cited as a type of resistance exercise. Its benefits are well studied in skeletal muscle, but its performance dynamics and new findings demonstrate that it may have a very important cardiorespiratory component. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of MP on cardiorespiratory and metabolic variables in controlled hypertensive patients. Twenty-two hypertensive women (51.7 ± 5.9 years) who participated in an intervention protocol with PM on the ground and devices, basic system, for 15 weeks (42 sessions) were evaluated. All volunteers signed an informed consent form (FICF) and our study was approved by the UNIFESP Research Ethics Committee (CAEE: 08830819.1.0000.5505). All variables were evaluated before and after the intervention. Post Hoc sample calculation was performed (power=0.987). Statistical analysis was performed using the Generalized Estimating Equation Model (GEE) and effect magnitude using Cohen's d. The results obtained, in mean and standard deviation (M±SD pre vs M±SD post), and statistical difference (*), were: height (158.90±4.82 vs 160.11±4.73*), body mass 69.28±6.94 vs 68.71±6.97), body mass index (BMI=27.44± 2.24 vs 26.80 ± 2.47*), waist circumference (HC= 85.43±4.93 vs 83.34±5.33*), hip circumference (HC= 103.86±5, 86 vs 102.01±5.43*), waist-hip ratio (WHR= 0.82±0.05 vs 0.81±0.04*), waist-height ratio (WHtR= 0.537±0.032 vs 0.520± 0.036*), flexibility (20.86±9.81 vs 28.37±8.95*), right hand strength (22.65±3.81 vs 26.02±3.84*), hand strength left (21.34±4.32 vs 25.57±3.22*), fasting blood glucose (100.77±11.08 vs 94.77±10.63*), total cholesterol (TC= 222.09 ±36.26 vs 192.81±33.48*), HDL (52.59±10.09 vs 55.54±9.68) and LDL (142.95±36.06 vs 117.37±33) fractions .89*), triglycerides (TG= 143.09±47.44 vs 118.63±39.76*) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c= 5.72±0.41 vs 5.42±0.43*), maximal inspiratory pressure (PIMax= 43.18±15.19 vs 121.36±24.27*), maximal expiratory pressure (PEMax= 71.36±14.86 vs 136.82±26.17*), pulmonary ventilation minute at peak (VE= 43.82±9.81 vs 52.07±10.01*), in the first threshold (VE LT= 20.29±4.05 vs 26.95±5.63*) and in the second threshold (VE RC= 33.85±6.12 vs 45.21±7.01*), ventilatory reserve (RV= 52.41±13.36 vs 44.00±11.89*), tidal volume (VC= 1.32±0.25 vs 1.49 ±0.26*), forced vital capacity (FVC= 2.92±0.36 vs 3.05±0.35*), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1= 2.37±0.40 vs 2, 44±0.33), peak expiratory flow (PEF= 5.77±1.13 vs 6.57±0.88*), ratio between forced expiratory volume in % of FVC (FEV1/FVC%= 79, 11±7.53 vs 82.47±5.04*), mean forced expiratory flow (FEF 25-75%= 2.34±0.84 vs 2.67±0.85*), resting heart rate ( HR= 71.77±10.63 vs 67.64±9.74*), at peak exercise (HR Max= 146.14±21.40 vs 154.50±16.12*), at the 1st ventilatory threshold (HR LT=106.18±18.22 vs 115.95±16.87*) and at the 2nd ventilatory threshold (HR HR=136.41±21.09 vs 144.50±20.42*) systolic blood pressure 24-hour (SBP= 124.29±10.61 vs 117.18±6.99*), 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (DBP= 80.63±7.42) vs 76.74±6.46* ), mean arterial pressure (MAP= 100.75±8.62 vs 95.95±5.56*), power at the first ventilatory threshold (Power LT= 38.86±12.33 vs 62.95±12.76*) and in the second ventilatory threshold (Power RC= 80.62±18.27 vs 104.30±13.36*), maximum consumption of absolute O2 at peak (VO2= 1232.59±285.36 vs 1352.91±219 .68*), in the first ventilatory threshold (VO2 LT= 764.36±152.96 vs 951.09±169.72*) and in the second ventilatory threshold (VO2 RC= 1068.45±205.09 vs 1296.05 ±224.71*), maximum relative consumption of O2 at the peak (VO2/kg= 17.94±3.71 vs 19.76±3.11*), at the first ventilatory threshold (VO2/Kg LT= 11.23 ±2.03 vs 13.89±2.16*) and at the second threshold (VO2R/Kg RC= 16.00±2.95 vs 19.20±3.01*), expired O2 pressure (PetO2= 115 .09±3.54 vs 117.91±2.87*), expired pressure of CO2 (PetCO2= 38.00±3.04 vs 35.64±2.58*), ventilatory equivalent for O2 (VE/ VO2= 35.90±4.80 vs 39.85±4.50*), ventilatory equivalent for CO2 (VE/VCO2= 31.31±3.00 vs 33.77±2.75*), VE/ VCO2 slope (27.50±4.17 vs 25.77±3.63*) and OUES (1518.23±360.22 vs 1690.36±37 8.90*). We conclude that 15 weeks of MP in mat and equipment was able to improve the cardiorespiratory and metabolic fitness of controlled hypertensive patients.
Descrição
Citação
BARBOSA, Rodrigo Fernandes. Efeitos crônicos do Método Pilates sobre as respostas cardiorrespiratórias e metabólicas em mulheres hipertensas controladas. Orientadora: Alessandra Medeiros. 2021. 112 f. Dissertação (Mestrado Interdisciplinar em Ciências da Saúde) – Instituto de Saúde e Sociedade, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Santos, 2021.