Published in

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Fisioterapia em Movimento, (33), 2020

DOI: 10.1590/1980-5918.033.ar02

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Training with elastic and conventional devices on body composition: systematic review and meta-analysis

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Question mark in circle
Preprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Postprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Published version: policy unknown
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: Given the practicality and low cost of elastic devices, a comparison with conventional devices may be able to quantify gains from both tools for further conclusions. Objective: Compare the effect of resistance training with elastic (tubes and resistance band) and conventional (weight machines and dumbbells) devices on body composition. Method: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, PEDro and CENTRAL databases were searched from the earliest records to July 25, 2018. Data were described in standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Four studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis did not show superiority among the analyzed methods for the variables investigated (SMD = -2.04, 95% CI -7.56, 3.48, p < 0.00001, lean mass: SMD = 0.28, 95% CI -0.29, 0.85, p = 0.97, body fat: SMD = 2.77, 95% CI -0.05, 5.59, p = 0.92, body mass: SMD = 1.22, 95% CI -0.29, 2.74, p = 0.11). Conclusion: The results of the meta-analysis showed superiority of outcome from training in conventional devices only for the variable fat mass. For the other variables, no statistically significant differences were found. Elastic resistance can promote similar outcomes to resistance in different population profiles and from various protocols on variables related to body composition.