1.    Introduction
One of the growing consequences of modern mechanized lifestyles is a significant reduction in physical activity, leading to movement deficiency. While the full potential of technological advancements has yet to be realized, their adverse effects such as increased consumerism and the widespread prevalence of sedentary behavior-related diseases have already become apparent. Physical inactivity is a major contributor to serious health conditions, including obesity, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, and reduced pulmonary capacity, ultimately threatening overall well-being and diminishing quality of life (1). Given the escalating risks associated with obesity and weight gain, there is an urgent need for preventive strategies. Research on the health implications of excess weight and subcutaneous fat has increasingly motivated both men and women to engage in regular physical activity. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), over 1.6 billion individuals worldwide have a Body Mass Index (BMI) exceeding 25, and approximately 400 million exceed a BMI of 30. In Iran, the obesity rate among women is estimated at 26.53% (3).
Maintaining optimal physiological and functional status is essential for preserving health, as excess weight can negatively impact skeletal structure and overall body composition (4). Scientific evidence suggests that appropriate exercise programs improve various aspects of physical fitness, including muscular strength and endurance, flexibility, and body composition. The ultimate aim of physical activity is to promote health, vitality, and longevity (5). Physical fitness levels often reflect individuals' activity habits and overall lifestyle. Functional training methods such as TRX suspension exercises have emerged as effective interventions for enhancing body composition and physical performance parameters (7,8). TRX is a versatile training tool consisting of adjustable suspension straps anchored to a fixed point, allowing for a wide range of bodyweight exercises (9). This study aims to compare the effectiveness of traditional resistance training and TRX-integrated resistance training in improving body composition, muscular strength, balance, flexibility, and core strength in non-athletic women. 
2.    Methods
This quasi-experimental study aimed to examine the effects of traditional resistance training and TRX-assisted resistance training on body composition and physical fitness in sedentary overweight women. Thirty women from Ardabil, aged 25–35 years with a high body mass index (BMI), were randomly assigned to one of two groups: resistance training (R, n = 15) and TRX-integrated resistance training (TRX+R, n = 15). Both training programs were conducted over five weeks, with four sessions per week. Assessments were conducted before and after the intervention, including measures of body composition (weight, BMI, body fat percentage, and waist-to-hip ratio), balance (static balance and Y-balance tests), flexibility, muscular strength (1RM leg press and deadlift), and core stability (plank test). Data normality was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Paired and independent t-tests were performed in SPSS version 24, with the significance level set at p < 0.05.
3.    Results
Table 1, shows significant changes in body composition variables in both exercise groups (p < 0.05). Weight decreased by 1.87% in group R (from 68.08 ± 7.30 kg to 66.81 ± 7.10 kg; p = 0.01) and by 1.88% in TRX+R (from 71.13 ± 6.60 kg to 69.79 ± 5.90 kg; p = 0.01). BMI decreased by 1.89% in group R (from 25.45 ± 1.60 to 24.97 ± 1.60; p = 0.001) and by 1.97% in TRX+R (from 27.40 ± 3.00 to 26.86 ± 2.66; p = 0.015). Body fat percentage showed a significant reduction of 10.19% in group R (from 29.34 ± 2.00% to 26.35 ± 3.66%; p = 0.013) and 5.61% in TRX+R (from 28.69 ± 1.70% to 27.08 ± 1.60%; p = 0.004). For waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), group R experienced a 2.60% increase (from 0.77 ± 0.01 to 0.79 ± 0.01; p = 0.01), while TRX+R saw a 2.63% increase (from 0.76 ± 0.02 to 0.78 ± 0.01; p = 0.027). Despite statistical significance, the greatest fat reduction occurred in group R, while TRX+R showed greater improvements in weight and fat percentage.

4.    Conclusion
This study demonstrated significant improvements in lower-body muscle strength following five weeks of training in both groups, although no significant differences were observed between them. These findings are consistent with previous research on resistance training, which attributes strength gains primarily to neuromuscular adaptations and enhanced motor unit coordination. Increased motor unit recruitment and firing rates likely played a key role in these improvements. Notably, the greater gains in lower-body strength observed in the TRX group may be attributed to the inherent instability of TRX exercises, which require greater joint stabilization and motor unit activation (12). Although TRX exercises rely on bodyweight resistance similar to traditional resistance training, their unstable nature demands enhanced balance and core engagement, potentially leading to superior neuromuscular coordination (9), as supported by prior studies (8). The present study indicates that both resistance training alone and resistance training combined with TRX resulted in improvements in static and dynamic balance, with no significant difference observed between the two groups. Similarly, Baum (2012) reported no significant differences in balance improvement between traditional resistance training and unstable surface training, supporting the current findings (15). The observed balance improvement in the TRX group may be attributed to the instability of the exercises, which likely enhanced core muscle activation and lower-body strength.
Overall, both TRX-assisted and traditional resistance training effectively improved body composition, balance, flexibility, and muscular strength, although the magnitude of improvement may vary depending on the specific characteristics of the training modality. Although TRX exercises were expected to produce superior improvements in the measured variables, the current findings suggest that both TRX-assisted and traditional resistance training yield comparable benefits. Further research with larger samples and longer training durations is recommended to better determine whether TRX training offers significant advantages over conventional resistance training.

Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines
There were no ethical considerations to be considered in this research.
Funding
This research did not receive any financial support from government, private, or non-profit organizations.
Authors' contributions
All authors contributed equally to preparing the article.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest associated with this article.