Regular And Habitual Exercisers: Advantages In Heart Rates Of Moderate-intensity Walking

Abstract

PURPOSE: Based on the Transtheoretical Model (Prochaska & Marcus, 1994), people can be categorized into five exercise stages (ES): ES 1, no exercise, and no intention to change; ES 2, no exercise but considering a change; ES 3, having some change/exercise; ES 4, performing regular exercise recently (less than six months) and meeting Federal Physical Activity Guidelines (FPAG); and ES 5, performing regular exercise habitually (at least six months) and meeting FPAG. This study examined how heart rates (HR) were different during 3.5-mph walking among young adults in different ESs. METHODS: ES was assessed with the Exercise Stages of Change Survey (Marcus & Forsyth, 2009) for 148 university students (66 Females) in the US. Forty-four participants (20 F) were in ESs 2 or 3, forming a Low ES Group (LESG); 47 (20 F) in ES 4, forming a stage-4 group (S4G), and 57 (26 F) in ES 5, forming a stage-5 group (S5G). No participants were in ES 1. Resting HR was assessed for calculating HR reserve (HRR). Further, all participants walked on treadmill at 3.5 mph for three minutes, and HR at the end of the walking was measured with HR monitors (Sigma PC26.14). One-way MANOVA was run to examine differences in HR, maximal HR% (%HRmax), and %HRR at the end of the three-min walking among the three ES groups. RESULTS: No age difference (p > .05) was found among the three ES groups (LESG 21.31 ± 2.32, S4G 21.23 ± 1.67, S5G 21.09 ± 1.11). In contrast, significant differences occurred in all the three HRs in favor of S5G. Specifically, in walking HR, S5G (107.96 ± 13.02) vs. LESG (117.59 ± 14.28), p. < .001; and S5G vs. S4G (115.68 ± 12.76), p < .005. In %HRmax, S5G (54.19 ± 6.48) vs. LESG (59.23 ± 7.09), p. < .001; and S5G vs. S4G (58.19 ± 6.32), p < .005. Finally, in %HRR, S5G (30.30 ± 7.89) vs. LESG (35.63 ± 9.28), p <. 005; and S5G vs. S4G (34.25 ± 8.61), p = .02. CONCLUSIONS: Even among young adults, regular and habitual exercisers (those in S5G) demonstrate significantly lower and healthier HRs in moderate-intensity walking not only than those in LESG, but also than individuals in S4G. Those in S4G, however, fail to show such advantages over LESG people. While both S4G and S5G meet the FPAG, the former has met the FPAG for less than six months, whereas the latter has met the FPAG for at least six months. Only long-time commitment to exercise can result in substantial health benefits.