Exercise Participation Is More Important Than Exercise Environment For Enhancement Of Body Composition

Document Type

Conference Presentation

Department

Health, Exercise, and Sport Sciences Department

Conference Title

American College of Sports Medicine - Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise conference

Organization

American College of Sports Medicine

Location

Virtual

Date of Presentation

8-1-2021

Journal Publication

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

ISSN

0195-9131

DOI

10.1249/01.mss.0000759060.33579.c6

Volume

53

Issue

8S

First Page

4

Abstract

There are a variety of exercise environments and numerous modes of physical assessment (e.g., body fat percent, skeletal muscle mass, and visceral fat storage). Data are scarce comparing the characteristics of body composition change between exercise settings. PURPOSE: To determine the effect of training environment on anthropometric outcomes. METHODS: We performed baseline and follow-up tests on 114 collegiate athletes, 384 CrossFit members, and 12 commercial gym members using the InBody 770 device. We recorded BMI, body fat percent, skeletal muscle mass, total fat mass, trunk fat mass, and InBody scores for visceral fat and overall composition. Paired-samples t-tests measured changes in these variables over time; repeated measures ANCOVA and multiple linear regression analyzed explanatory factors for those changes. RESULTS: At baseline, subjects (54.3% male) were 32.1 ± 10.4 years old, had a BMI of 28.6 ± 6.7 kg/m2, 25.7 ± 12.3% body fat, 78.0 ± 20.0 lb muscle mass, 50.0 ± 35.5 lb fat mass, and 25.8 ± 15.3 lb trunk fat. InBody scores were 9.2 ± 5.9 for visceral fat and 79.1 ± 13.0 for overall composition. Between baseline and follow-up (140.4 ± 131.6 days), subjects reduced BMI by 0.4 ± 1.3 kg/m2 (p < 0.001), body fat percent by 0.9 ± 2.0 points (p < 0.001), fat mass by 2.5 ± 7.0 lb (p < 0.001), trunk fat by 1.4 ± 3.5 lb (p < 0.001), and visceral fat score by 0.5 ± 1.5 (p < 0.001). InBody composition score improved by 0.8 ± 4.2 (p = 0.001). Skeletal muscle mass was unchanged (p = 0.822). ANCOVA detected no differences in sex, training environment, or duration between tests when assessing fat mass, trunk fat, and visceral fat (p > 0.100). Sex was a significant factor in body fat percent (p = 0.017). Exercise setting exhibited trends in body fat percent (p = 0.056) and InBody score (p = 0.076). Regression models, holding constant sex, age, duration between tests, and baseline values, found no association between exercise setting and changes in BMI (p = 0.618), body fat percent (p = 0.343), fat mass (p = 0.231), trunk fat (p = 0.453), visceral fat (p = 0.994), or InBody score (p = 0.295). Baseline levels were the strongest predictors of improvement in BMI, fat mass, trunk fat, visceral fat, and InBody score (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in anthropometric outcomes were found in each exercise setting; no setting emerged as superior to the others.

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS