Benefits of Bodyweight Training
The study aimed to assess the benefits of a 10-week bodyweight training program on body composition and physical fitness in non-professional sportswomen aged 21-23. Using a TANITA BC-1000 scale, participants’ body mass and composition were measured, and various physical fitness parameters, including strength, endurance, flexibility, and aerobic capacity, were evaluated before and after the program. The results showed minor increases in body mass (1.16%) and body fat percentage (2.43%), with no changes in muscle mass or body water percentage. Notably, bodyweight training significantly improved lower extremity explosive strength (5.6%; p<0.01), trunk strength endurance (10.7%; p<0.01), and aerobic capacity (33.3%; p<0.05). In conclusion, despite minimal impact on body composition without diet control, the study underscores the notable benefits of bodyweight training in enhancing overall physical fitness, including muscle strength, endurance, capacity, and flexibility.
Physical fitness has a major influence on health, appearance, and well-being. A sufficient level of physical fitness guarantees a higher quality of life and helps prevent the development of many “non-contagious diseases”, such as cardiovascular disorders or obesity. According to the concept of Health-Related Fitness (HRF), physical fitness is one of the main factors impacting health [1]. HRF emphasises the importance of maintaining an optimal level of health in terms of the following components: morphological fitness, musculoskeletal fitness, motor fitness, cardiorespiratory fitness, and flexibility. Morphological fitness includes body structure and composition, which, if abnormal, contribute to a higher risk of death and diseases [2]. Musculoskeletal fitness comprises such elements as the strength and endurance of the muscles of the legs, arms, and trunk, a high level of which makes it possible for the entire body to function properly [3]. Low motor fitness, on the other hand, is a risk factor for falls, which frequently lead to bone fractures [4]. Body posture and flexibility also play an important role and insufficient control of the body and reduced trunk flexibility are associated with pain in the lumbosacral region of the spine [5]. However, it is cardiorespiratory fitness that is key in the concept of Health-Related Fitness, as its low level increases the risk of heart disease and premature death [6, 7].An efficient way of impacting all the components of physical activity listed in HRF is health training, which can have the form of endurance or strength training [8]. Strength training, which has so far mainly been associated with increasing muscle mass by exercising at the gym, can also have the form of bodyweight training, that is exercise using the weight of one’s body. This relatively unpopular form of strength training has undergone dynamic development in the past few years, owing to the fact that it benefits muscle strength and endurance and, as is worth emphasising, cardiorespiratory fitness. The advantage of such training is the fact that it includes functional exercises engaging many muscle groups, which additionally help improve balance, prioperception, and flexibility [9]. Moreover, bodyweight training is a plausible option for persons who claim that their recreational physical activity is limited due to a lack of free time and financial difficulties [10]. Such persons could take advantage of the fact that bodyweight training can be done at home, takes a comparatively short time (12-40 minutes depending on the training regime), and does not require using special equipment. Bearing in mind these benefits of bodyweight training, the aim of the study was to assess the impact of 10 weeks of body-weight training designed by M. Lauren and J. Clark [11] on selected elements of body composition (body mass, muscle mass, and the percentage of body fat and water) and parameters of physical fitness (strength, strength endurance, flexibility, and aerobic capacity) of women aged 21-23 years who do not practice sports professionally
The study involved 15 women aged between 21 and 23 years. Their mean age was 22 years 2 months. The women’s physical fitness and physical features were assessed twice, that is before implementing the 10-week exercise programme (in December 2012) and after its completion (in March 2013). The assessment was done under identical conditions, at the sports hall and gym at the Cracow University of Economics, and it consisted of the following.1. The subjects’ physical parameters were assessed: height was measured using an anthropometer, and body mass and composition, i.e. muscle mass and the percentage of fat and water in the body, were assessed using a TANITA BC-1000 scale. The subjects’ BMI (Body Mass Index) was also calculated. 2. The following physical fitness tests were conducted:a) standing long jump (cm) – to assess the explosive strength of the lower extremities; b) back overhead 3 kg medicine ball throw (cm) – to assess the dynamic strength of the shoulder girdle, back, and stomach muscles;c) arm hang (s) – to assess the strength endurance of the shoulder and shoulder girdle muscles; d) sit-ups (number of repetitions/30 seconds) – to assess the strength endurance of the trunk muscles;e) dynamometer grip test – to assess of the power of grip of the left and right hands;f) sit-and-reach test (cm) – to assess flexibility;g) Astrand-Rhyming test – to assess aerobic capacity. 3. An evaluation of the subjects’ speed and strength capaci-ties was performed using biomechanical methods: the vertical jump was measured using an accelerometer con-nected to a computer, by means of the Myotest PRO sys-tem. The subjects’ goal was to jump as high as possible during:a) a counter-movement jump (CMJ) with arm swing;b) a squat jump (SJ) with no arm swing. Each of the jumps was done three times, and the one with the best score was subjected to further analysis. The jumping tests made it possible to calculate the following biomechanical parameters:a) H (cm) – the height of the centre of gravity;b) P’ (W/kg) – derived power in the takeoff phase.
The level of the subjects’ physical fitness before and after the completion of the 10-week bodyweight training programme, found that the subjects’ scores in seven out of nine tests had improved (tab. 2).An analysis of the results obtained for strength revealed a minor decrease in the dynamic strength of the shoulder girdle, back, and stomach (test: back overhead medicine ball throw), by 3.5%, and in the static strength (test: dynamometer grip test) of the left hand, by 4.2.%. However, an increase in the static strength of the right hand (by 2.4%) and explosive strength of the lower extremities (from 1.7% to 5.6%) was found in the fol-lowing tests: standing long jump and two types of jumps mea-sured using the Myotest system, that is the counter-movement jump (CMJ) and squat jump (SJ). The differences between the scores for the first and second assessments were statistically significant only for the standing long jump test (improvement by 5.6%; p<0.05), and they were not statistically significant for the other tests (p>0.05).The subjects’ scores also improved when it comes to the strength endurance of the shoulder girdle and shoulder muscles (test: arm hang), by 30.9%, and of the trunk muscles (test: sit-ups), by 10.7%. The differences were statistically significant for the trunk muscles (p<0.01).Moreover, the bodyweight training programme was proven to have had a positive impact on the flexibility of the subjects: after completing the 10-week programme the subjects’ scores in this respect were better by a mean of 2.6% than before they started it. This improvement was probably due to the specificity of the programme which had been implemented, as apart from strength training it also included elements of dynamic stretch-ing.A very important component of physical fitness is aerobic capacity, which, owing to the specificity of strength training, is often neglected by persons who train at the gym. Isolated exercises targeting particular muscle groups and the loads used are usually so great that they lead to muscle fatigue rather than stimulate the cardiorespiratory system. In this study, however the subjects’ aerobic capacity increased by as much as 33.3% (p<0.05)