Effects of Weighted Hula-Hooping Compared to Walking on Abdominal Fat, Trunk Muscularity, and Metabolic Parameters in Overweight Subjects: A Randomized Controlled Study

Abstract

Background: Weighted hula-hoops have gained popularity, but whether they indeed reshape the trunk or have beneficial metabolic effects in overweight subjects is unknown.

Objectives: To determine effects of hula-hooping and walking matched for energy expenditure on android fat %, trunk muscle mass, and metabolic parameters in a randomized cross-over study.

Design: We recruited 55 overweight nondiabetic subjects, who were randomized to hula-hooping (HULA) for 6 weeks using a 1.5-kg weighted hula-hoop followed by walking (WALK) for another 6 weeks or vice versa. The increments in energy expenditure were similar by HULA and WALK. Body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) and metabolic parameters were measured at baseline and after HULA and WALK. The primary endpoint was the change in fat % in the android region.

Results: A total of 53subjects (waist 92 ± 1 cm, body mass index 28 ± 1 kg/m2) completed the study. Body weight changed similarly (-0.6 ± 0.2 vs. -0.5 ± 0.2 kg, nonsignificant; HULA vs. WALK). During the intervention the subjects hula-hooped on average 12.8 ± 0.5 min/day and walked 9,986 ± 376 steps/day. The % fat in the android region decreased significantly by HULA but not by WALK (between-group change p < 0.001). Trunk muscle mass increased more by HULA than by WALK (p < 0.05). Waist circumference decreased more by HULA than by WALK (-3.1 ± 0.3 cm vs. -0.7 ± 0.4 cm, p < 0.001; HULA vs. WALK). WALK but not HULA significantly lowered systolic blood pressure and increased HDL cholesterol while HULA significantly decreased LDL cholesterol.

Conclusions: Hula-hooping with a weighted hula-hoop can be used to decrease abdominal fat % and increase trunk muscle mass in overweight subjects. Its LDL lowering effect resembles that described for resistance training.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01913171.

Keywords: Body composition; Exercise; Obesity; Waist circumference.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

© 2019 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.

Figures

Fig. 1

Flow chart of study design. A total of 55 subjects were recruited and randomized into two groups. Half of the subjects started with 6 weeks of hula-hooping (HULA) followed by 6 weeks of walking (WALK), while the other half started by walking for 6 weeks and then switched to hula-hooping for another 6 weeks. A total of 53 subjects completed the study. The primary endpoint was the % change in android fat as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) before and after the interventions measured at visits 3 (week 0), 6 (week 6), and 9 (week 12). * The metabolic study (visits 2, 5, and 8) included blood sampling for measurement of features of the metabolic/insulin resistance syndrome (lipids, liver enzymes, glucose, HbA1c, and insulin) in addition to recording of blood pressure, body weight, height, and waist and hip circumferences.

Fig. 2

A study subject hula-hooping using a 1.5-kg weighted hula-hoop (published with permission of the subject).

Fig. 3

Effect of exercise modalities on body weight (A), android fat % (B), trunk muscle mass (C), and waist circumference (D). Data are given as mean ± SEM. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.001; *** p < 0.0001; NS, nonsignificant.