Advertisement

Sports Medicine

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 164–175 | Cite as

The Physiological Effects of Bench/Step Exercise

  • Michele Scharff-Olson
  • Henry N. Williford
  • Daniel L. Blessing
  • Jennifer A. Brown
Leading Article

Summary

Recent investigation of acute cardiorespiratory responses to the current ‘popularised’ style of bench/step exercise has validated its use in improving aerobic physical fitness, particularly in women. However, no marked differences in relative measures of cardiorespiratory demand have been reported between men and women. Instructor data and training investigations further substantiate the effectiveness of bench/step exercise in promoting physical fitness, including upper body strength. However, the energy cost of bench/step exercise can vary dramatically. Important factors include, the selected step height, exercise rate, imposed step manoeuvre, routine format and use of hand-held weights. Hand-held weights may be more useful for men than woman.

During training, bench/step exercise has been reported to yield a high incidence of grade I injury complaints, particularly in the calf and shoulder region. However, nearly 90% of these complaints were attributable to acute muscle soreness. Few serious injuries have been associated with the activity. Biomechanical research has shown that the ground reaction forces (GRF) experienced during bench stepping are lower than running and directly related to the step height and type of manoeuvre. In addition, compared with novices, instructors exhibit a moderation in the GRF pattern generated during landing. This suggests that a learning effect has occurred and that teachers yield a more consistent landing pattern. Finally, the activity may be effective in improving body composition, but a consideration of factors related to energy expenditure (e.g. exercise duration and dietary control) appear to be important in regimens prescribed for modifying body fat.

Keywords

Ground Reaction Force Heart Rate Response Step Height Delay Onset Muscle Soreness Vertical Ground Reaction Force 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger, 1991Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brouha L. The step test: a simple method of measuring physical fitness for muscular work in young men. Res Q 1943; 14: 31–6Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeVries HA, Klafs CE. Prediction of maximal O2 intake from submaximal tests. J Sports Med 1965; 5: 207–14Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McArdle WD, Katch GS, Pechar GS, et al. Reliability and interrelationships between maximal oxygen intake, physical work capacity and step test scores in females. Med Sci Sports 1972; 4: 182–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Olson MS, Williford HN, Blessing DL, et al. The cardiovascular and metabolic effects of bench stepping exercise in females. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1991; 23: 1311–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harnischfeger HC, Raymond C, Hagerman C, et al. Incidence of injury following high and low impact aerobics versus running [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20(2 Suppl.): 24SGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williford HN, Richards LA, Olson MS, et al. Injury rates and changes associated with bench stepping and running in women [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27(5 Suppl.): 53SGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stanforth D, Stanforth PR, Velazquez KS. Aerobic requirement of bench stepping. Int J Sports Med 1993; 14: 129–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rupp JC, Johnson BF, Rupp DA, et al. Bench step activity: effects of bench height and hand held weights [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1992; 24(5 Suppl.): 12SGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Francis PR, Poliner J, Buono MJ, et al. Effects of choreography, step height, and gender on the metabolic cost of step training [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1992; 24(5 Suppl.): 12SGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaspard G, Schmal L, Porcari JP, et al. Effects of a seven-week aqua step training program on the aerobic capacity and body composition of college-aged women [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27(5 Suppl.): 179SGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    American College of Sports Medicine position statement. The recommended quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness in health adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1990; 22: 265–74Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koszuta LE. Low-impact aerobics: better than traditional aerobic dance?. Physician Sportsmed 1986; 14: 156–61Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goss FL, Robertson RJ, Spina RF, et al. Energy cost of bench stepping and pumping light handweights in trained subjects. Res Q Exerc Sport 1989; 60: 369–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blessing DL, Olson MS, Williford HN, et al. The energy cost of bench stepping with and without one and two pound handheld weights [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1991; 23(4 Suppl.): 28SGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Calarco L, Otto RM, Wygand J, et al. The metabolic cost of six common movement patterns of bench step aerobic dance [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1991; 23(4 Suppl.): 140SGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pronk NP, Pronk SJ, Sisco AW. Accuracy of the palpation technique to assess exercise heart rate during bench stepping exercise. J Strength Cond Res 1995; 9: 27–31Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brown SW, Berg K, Latin RL. Oxygen cost of aerobic dance bench stepping at three heights. J Strength Cond Res 1993; 7: 163–7Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olson MS, Williford HN. Accuracy of the ACSM equation for predicting the VO2 of ‘aerobic bench stepping’ in females [abstract no. 35]. 18th Annual Meeting, Southeast Regional Chapter of the ACSM; 1991 Jan 31–Feb 2: Louisville (Ky). Louisville (Ky): SEACSM Conference Proceedings, 1991Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson BF, Johnston KD, Winnier SA. Bench-step aerobic ground reaction forces for two steps at variable bench heights [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993; 25(5 Suppl.): 1958Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnson BF, Rupp JC, Berry SA, et al. Peak vertical ground reaction forces (PVGRFs) and time-to-peak force (TTPFs) in bench-step aerobics and other activities [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1992; 24(5 Suppl.): 783SGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moses RD, Blessing DL, Wang T, et al. Ground reaction forces in bench aerobics [abstract no. 49]. 22nd Annual Meeting, Southeast Regional Chapter of the ACSM: 1993 Jan 20–22: Greensboro (N.C.). Greensboro (N.C.): SEACSM Conference Proceedings, 1993Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Francis LL, Francis PR, Welshons-Smith K. Aerobic dance injuries: a survey of instructors. Physician Sportsmed 1985; 13: 105–11Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Garrick JG, Gillen MD, Whiteside P. The epidemiology of aerobic dance injuries. Am J Sports Med 1986; 14: 67–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kravitz L, Heyward VH, Stolarczyk LM, et al. Effects of step training with and without handweights on physiological and lipid profiles in women [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27(5 Suppl.): 179SGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Benke AR, Wilmore JH. Evaluation and regulation of body build and composition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1974Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koenig JM, Jahn DM, Dohmeier TE, et al. The effect of bench step aerobics on muscular strength, power, and endurance. J Strength Con Res 1995; 9: 43–6Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Williford HN, Blessing DL, Scharff M, et al. The physiological characteristics of female aerobic dance instructors. J Appl Sport Sci Res 1990; 4: 27–30Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kravitz L, Wilmerding V, Stolarcayk L, et al. Physiological profile of step aerobics instructors. J Strength Cond Res 1994; 8: 255–8Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moses RD. Ground reaction forces in bench aerobics [thesis]. Auburn: Auburn Univ., 1993Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner DJ, Verstraete MC, Hollering BL, et al. The effects of instruction on ground reaction forces in aerobic dance [abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1992; 24(5 Suppl.): 1117SGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Olson MS, Williford HN, Blessing DL, et al. Metabolic cost and fuel utilization of selected ‘aerobic’ bench stepping maneuvers [abstract no. 46]. 19th Annual Meeting, Southeast Regional Chapter of the ACSM; 1992 Jan 30–Feb 1; Auburn (Ala.): SEACSM Conference Proceedings, 1992Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Scharff-Olson
    • 1
  • Henry N. Williford
    • 1
  • Daniel L. Blessing
    • 2
  • Jennifer A. Brown
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Physical EducationHuman Performance Laboratory Auburn University at MontgomeryMontgomeryUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health and Human PerformanceAuburn UniversityAuburnUSA

Personalised recommendations