Cargando…

Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development

BACKGROUND: In this study, we investigated the effects of resistance training protocols with different loads on muscle hypertrophy and strength. METHODS: Twenty-one participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 (n = 7 for each) resistance training (RT) protocols to failure: High load 80 % 1RM (8–12...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fink, Julius, Kikuchi, Naoki, Yoshida, Shou, Terada, Kentaro, Nakazato, Koichi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899398/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2333-z
_version_ 1782436452222631936
author Fink, Julius
Kikuchi, Naoki
Yoshida, Shou
Terada, Kentaro
Nakazato, Koichi
author_facet Fink, Julius
Kikuchi, Naoki
Yoshida, Shou
Terada, Kentaro
Nakazato, Koichi
author_sort Fink, Julius
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In this study, we investigated the effects of resistance training protocols with different loads on muscle hypertrophy and strength. METHODS: Twenty-one participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 (n = 7 for each) resistance training (RT) protocols to failure: High load 80 % 1RM (8–12 repetitions) (H group), low load 30 % 1RM (30–40 repetitions) (L group) and a mixed RT protocol (M group) in which the participants switch from H to L every 2 weeks. RT consisted of three sets of unilateral preacher curls performed with the left arm 3 times/week with 90 s rest intervals between sets. The right arm served as control. Maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of the elbow flexors (elbow angle: 90°) and rate of force development (RFD, 0–50, 50–100, 100–200 and 200–300 ms) were measured. Cross-sectional area (CSA) of the elbow flexors was measured via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). All measurements were conducted before and after the 8 weeks of RT (72–96 h after the last RT). Statistical evaluations were performed with two-way repeated measures (time × group). RESULTS: After 8 weeks of 3 weekly RT sessions, significant increases in the left elbow flexor CSA [H: 9.1 ± 6.4 % (p = 0.001), L: 9.4 ± 5.3 % (p = 0.001), M: 8.8 ± 7.9 % (p = 0.001)] have been observed in each group, without significant differences between groups. Significant changes in elbow flexor isometric MVC have been observed in the H group (26.5 ± 27.0 %, p = 0.028), while no significant changes have been observed in the M (11.8 ± 36.4 %, p = 0.26) and L (4.6 ± 23.9 %, p = 0.65) groups. RFD significantly increased during the 50–100 ms phase in the H group only (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, as long as RT is conducted to failure, training load might not affect muscle hypertrophy in young men. Nevertheless, strength and RFD changes seem to be load-dependent. Furthermore, a non-linear RT protocol switching loads every 2 weeks might not lead to superior muscle hypertrophy nor strength gains in comparison with straight RT protocols.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4899398
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48993982016-06-27 Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development Fink, Julius Kikuchi, Naoki Yoshida, Shou Terada, Kentaro Nakazato, Koichi Springerplus Research BACKGROUND: In this study, we investigated the effects of resistance training protocols with different loads on muscle hypertrophy and strength. METHODS: Twenty-one participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 (n = 7 for each) resistance training (RT) protocols to failure: High load 80 % 1RM (8–12 repetitions) (H group), low load 30 % 1RM (30–40 repetitions) (L group) and a mixed RT protocol (M group) in which the participants switch from H to L every 2 weeks. RT consisted of three sets of unilateral preacher curls performed with the left arm 3 times/week with 90 s rest intervals between sets. The right arm served as control. Maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of the elbow flexors (elbow angle: 90°) and rate of force development (RFD, 0–50, 50–100, 100–200 and 200–300 ms) were measured. Cross-sectional area (CSA) of the elbow flexors was measured via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). All measurements were conducted before and after the 8 weeks of RT (72–96 h after the last RT). Statistical evaluations were performed with two-way repeated measures (time × group). RESULTS: After 8 weeks of 3 weekly RT sessions, significant increases in the left elbow flexor CSA [H: 9.1 ± 6.4 % (p = 0.001), L: 9.4 ± 5.3 % (p = 0.001), M: 8.8 ± 7.9 % (p = 0.001)] have been observed in each group, without significant differences between groups. Significant changes in elbow flexor isometric MVC have been observed in the H group (26.5 ± 27.0 %, p = 0.028), while no significant changes have been observed in the M (11.8 ± 36.4 %, p = 0.26) and L (4.6 ± 23.9 %, p = 0.65) groups. RFD significantly increased during the 50–100 ms phase in the H group only (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, as long as RT is conducted to failure, training load might not affect muscle hypertrophy in young men. Nevertheless, strength and RFD changes seem to be load-dependent. Furthermore, a non-linear RT protocol switching loads every 2 weeks might not lead to superior muscle hypertrophy nor strength gains in comparison with straight RT protocols. Springer International Publishing 2016-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4899398/ /pubmed/27350928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2333-z Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Fink, Julius
Kikuchi, Naoki
Yoshida, Shou
Terada, Kentaro
Nakazato, Koichi
Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title_full Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title_fullStr Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title_full_unstemmed Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title_short Impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
title_sort impact of high versus low fixed loads and non-linear training loads on muscle hypertrophy, strength and force development
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899398/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2333-z
work_keys_str_mv AT finkjulius impactofhighversuslowfixedloadsandnonlineartrainingloadsonmusclehypertrophystrengthandforcedevelopment
AT kikuchinaoki impactofhighversuslowfixedloadsandnonlineartrainingloadsonmusclehypertrophystrengthandforcedevelopment
AT yoshidashou impactofhighversuslowfixedloadsandnonlineartrainingloadsonmusclehypertrophystrengthandforcedevelopment
AT teradakentaro impactofhighversuslowfixedloadsandnonlineartrainingloadsonmusclehypertrophystrengthandforcedevelopment
AT nakazatokoichi impactofhighversuslowfixedloadsandnonlineartrainingloadsonmusclehypertrophystrengthandforcedevelopment