Coronavirus is part of a group of viruses responsible for seasonally causing acute respiratory syndromes that can be accompanied from mild symptoms to severe conditions with a significant mortality rate. In addition to hygiene care, social distance is one of the most efficient strategies to mitigate the spread of the virus and reduce impacts on the world. Therefore, government strategies have directed efforts to ensure the isolation at home of much of the world’s population. One of the strategies that has been considered an important tool to facilitate adherence to isolation is the encouragement of regular physical exercise, especially due to its ability to reduce feelings of anxiety and stress in the population. Thus, in parallel with the expansion of coronavirus in the world, the search for exercise at home has gained prominence on the internet, demonstrating the emerging need to think of strategies that can lead to an effective home practice in promoting adherence to a physically active lifestyle. On the other hand, some pertinent questions may arise, such as: how will the exercise prescription and follow-up of the population be carried out during this period? What guidelines should be followed for a safe and efficient prescription? What types of exercises should be prioritized? What are the criteria for this selection? Based on these questions, this study aimed to present a proposal, integrating the physiological and psychobiological aspects, of how physical exercise could be prescribed at home, considering the barriers faced by the population in the face of social isolation worldwide. In summary, here we suggest a prescription model that estimates the weekly performance of at least 150 minutes of aerobic exercises, as well as strength exercises for the main muscle groups. In addition, we guide the use of tools that allow the assessment of physical effort and personal satisfaction in training, with the aim of improving adherence and maintenance to a physical exercise program and thus contributing to health promotion during the COVID-19 pandemic.Palavras-chave: exercice prescription, home training, lifestyle, pandemic Covid-19

No abstract

The aim of this study was compare changes in upper body muscle strength and size in trained men performing resistance training (RT) programs involving multi-joint plus single-joint (MJ+SJ) or only multi-joint (MJ) exercises. Twenty young men with at least 2 years of experience in RT were randomized in 2 groups: MJ+SJ (n = 10; age, 27.7 ± 6.6 years) and MJ (n = 10; age, 29.4 ± 4.6 years). Both groups trained for 8 weeks following a linear periodization model. Measures of elbow flexors and extensors 1-repetition maximum (1RM), flexed arm circumference (FAC), and arm muscle circumference (AMC) were taken pre- and post-training period. Both groups significantly increased 1RM for elbow flexion (4.99% and 6.42% for MJ and MJ+SJ, respectively), extension (10.60% vs 9.79%, for MJ and MJ+SJ, respectively), FAC (1.72% vs 1.45%, for MJ and MJ+SJ, respectively), and AMC (1.33% vs 3.17% for MJ and MJ+SJ, respectively). Comparison between groups revealed no significant difference in any variable. In conclusion, 8 weeks of RT involving MJ or MJ+SJ resulted in similar alterations in muscle strength and size in trained participants. Therefore, the addition of SJ exercises to a RT program involving MJ exercises does not seem to promote additional benefits to trained men, suggesting MJ-only RT to be a time-efficient approach.

The aim of this study was to verify the effects of a high-intensity jump-based aquatic exercise (HIIAE) program on bone mass and functional fitness in postmenopausal women. We randomly assigned 25 women (65 ± 7 years) into two groups: Training group (T, n = 15) and Untrained group (Un, n = 10). The T group was submitted to 24 weeks of HIIAE program, where each session lasted for 30 minutes. The following parameters were assessed before and 6 months following the intervention: bone and physical fitness; lumbar spine (LS), total femur (TF), and whole body (WB) bone mineral density (BMD); agility (time up-and-go, TUG); and leg strength (chair stand test, CS). We observed a significant increase (p < 0.01) in LS, (Un: -0.88 ± 3.55, T: 3.71 ± 3.68; %), TF (Un: -1.38 ± 17.76, T: 6.52 ± 2.71; %), and WB (Un: 2.09 ± 3.17, T: 3.23 ± 4.18) BMD in the T group. Regarding functional fitness, the T group showed improvements in both TUG (before: 6.86 ± 1.24 vs. after: 6.22 ± 1.13 seconds; p < 0.05) and CS (before: 16 ± 4 vs. after: 19 ± 5 repetitions; p > 0.05) tests when compared with the U group's TUG (before: 5 ± 1, after: 6 ± 1 seconds; p < 0.05) and CS (before: 20 ± 2, after: 19 ± 2 repetitions; p > 0.05) scores. Our data suggest that a high-intensity, jump-based interval aquatic exercise program is able to improve BMD and functional fitness parameters in postmenopausal women.

Evangelista, AL, De Souza, EO, Moreira, DCB, Alonso, AC, Teixeira, CVLS, Wadhi, T, Rauch, J, Bocalini, DS, Pereira, PEDA, and Greve, JMDA. Interset stretching vs. traditional strength training: effects on muscle strength and size in untrained individuals. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S159–S166, 2019—This study compared the effects of 8 weeks of traditional strength training (TST) and interset stretching (ISS) combined with TST on muscular adaptations. Twenty-nine sedentary, healthy adults were randomly assigned to either the TST (n = 17; 28.0 ± 6.4 years) or ISS (n = 12; 26.8 ± 6.1 years) group. Both groups performed 6 strength exercises encompassing the whole body (bench press, elbow extension, seated rows, biceps curl, knee extension, and knee flexion) performing 4 sets of 8–12 repetition maximum (RM) with a 90-second rest between sets. However, the ISS group performed static passive stretching, at maximum amplitude, for 30 seconds between sets. Both groups performed training sessions twice a week on nonconsecutive days. Muscle strength (i.e., 1RM) and hypertrophy (i.e., muscle thickness [MT] by ultrasonography) were measured at pre-test and after 8 weeks of training. Both groups increased 1RM bench press (p ≤ 0.0001): ISS (23.4%, CIdiff: 4.3 kg–11.1 kg) and TST (22.2%, CIdiff: 5.2 kg–10.9 kg) and 1RM knee extension (p ≤ 0.0001): ISS (25.5%, CIdiff: 5.6 kg–15.0 kg) and TST (20.6%, CIdiff: 4.4 kg–12.3 kg). Both groups increased MT of biceps brachii (BIMT), triceps brachii (TRMT), and rectus femoris (RFMT) (p ≤ 0.0001). BIMT: ISS (7.2%, CIdiff: 1.14–3.5 mm) and TST (4.7%, CIdiff: 0.5–2.5 mm), TRMT: ISS (12.3%, CIdiff: 1.1–4.4 mm) and TST (7.1%, CIdiff: 0.3–3.1 mm), and RFMT: ISS (12.4%, CIdiff: 1.1–2.9 mm) and TST (9.1%, CIdiff: 0.7–2.2 mm). For vastus lateralis muscle thickness (VLMT) and sum of the 4 muscle thickness sites (ΣMT), there was a significant group by time interaction (p ≤ 0.02) in which ISS increased VLMT and ΣMT to a greater extent than TST. Vastus lateralis muscle thickness: ISS (17.0%, CIdiff: 1.5–3.1 mm) and TST (7.3%, CIdiff: 0.7–2.1 mm), and ΣMT: ISS (10.5%, CIdiff: 6.5–9.0 mm) and TST (6.7%, CIdiff: 3.9–8.3 mm). Although our findings might suggest a benefit of adding ISS into TST for optimizing muscle hypertrophy, our data are not sufficient enough to conclude that ISS is superior to TST for inducing muscle hypertrophic adaptations. More studies are warranted to elucidate the effects of ISS compared with TST protocols on skeletal muscle. However, our findings support that adding ISS to regular TST regimens does not compromise muscular adaptations during the early phase of training (<8 weeks) in untrained individuals.