Cargando…

Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis

PURPOSE: The relationship between changes in muscle size and strength may be affected by both measurement and statistical approaches, but their effects have not been fully considered or quantified. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to explore how different methods of measurement and a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vigotsky, Andrew D., Schoenfeld, Brad J., Than, Christian, Brown, J. Mark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6026459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29967737
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5071
_version_ 1783336447027183616
author Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Than, Christian
Brown, J. Mark
author_facet Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Than, Christian
Brown, J. Mark
author_sort Vigotsky, Andrew D.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The relationship between changes in muscle size and strength may be affected by both measurement and statistical approaches, but their effects have not been fully considered or quantified. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to explore how different methods of measurement and analysis can affect inferences surrounding the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain. METHODS: Data from a previous study—in which participants performed eight weeks of elbow flexor training, followed by an eight-week period of detraining—were reanalyzed using different statistical models, including standard between-subject correlations, analysis of covariance, and hierarchical linear modeling. RESULTS: The associative relationship between strength and hypertrophy is highly dependent upon both method/site of measurement and analysis; large differences in variance accounted for (VAF) by the statistical models were observed (VAF = 0–24.1%). Different sites and measurements of muscle size showed a range of correlations coefficients with one another (r = 0.326–0.945). Finally, exploratory analyses revealed moderate-to-strong relationships between within-individual strength-hypertrophy relationships and strength gained over the training period (ρ = 0.36–0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Methods of measurement and analysis greatly influence the conclusions that may be drawn from a given dataset. Analyses that do not account for inter-individual differences may underestimate the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain, and different methods of assessing muscle size will produce different results. It is suggested that robust experimental designs and analysis techniques, which control for different mechanistic sources of strength gain and inter-individual differences (e.g., muscle moment arms, muscle architecture, activation, and normalized muscle force), be employed in future investigations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6026459
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60264592018-07-02 Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis Vigotsky, Andrew D. Schoenfeld, Brad J. Than, Christian Brown, J. Mark PeerJ Kinesiology PURPOSE: The relationship between changes in muscle size and strength may be affected by both measurement and statistical approaches, but their effects have not been fully considered or quantified. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to explore how different methods of measurement and analysis can affect inferences surrounding the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain. METHODS: Data from a previous study—in which participants performed eight weeks of elbow flexor training, followed by an eight-week period of detraining—were reanalyzed using different statistical models, including standard between-subject correlations, analysis of covariance, and hierarchical linear modeling. RESULTS: The associative relationship between strength and hypertrophy is highly dependent upon both method/site of measurement and analysis; large differences in variance accounted for (VAF) by the statistical models were observed (VAF = 0–24.1%). Different sites and measurements of muscle size showed a range of correlations coefficients with one another (r = 0.326–0.945). Finally, exploratory analyses revealed moderate-to-strong relationships between within-individual strength-hypertrophy relationships and strength gained over the training period (ρ = 0.36–0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Methods of measurement and analysis greatly influence the conclusions that may be drawn from a given dataset. Analyses that do not account for inter-individual differences may underestimate the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain, and different methods of assessing muscle size will produce different results. It is suggested that robust experimental designs and analysis techniques, which control for different mechanistic sources of strength gain and inter-individual differences (e.g., muscle moment arms, muscle architecture, activation, and normalized muscle force), be employed in future investigations. PeerJ Inc. 2018-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6026459/ /pubmed/29967737 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5071 Text en ©2018 Vigotsky et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Kinesiology
Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Than, Christian
Brown, J. Mark
Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title_full Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title_fullStr Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title_full_unstemmed Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title_short Methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
title_sort methods matter: the relationship between strength and hypertrophy depends on methods of measurement and analysis
topic Kinesiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6026459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29967737
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5071
work_keys_str_mv AT vigotskyandrewd methodsmattertherelationshipbetweenstrengthandhypertrophydependsonmethodsofmeasurementandanalysis
AT schoenfeldbradj methodsmattertherelationshipbetweenstrengthandhypertrophydependsonmethodsofmeasurementandanalysis
AT thanchristian methodsmattertherelationshipbetweenstrengthandhypertrophydependsonmethodsofmeasurementandanalysis
AT brownjmark methodsmattertherelationshipbetweenstrengthandhypertrophydependsonmethodsofmeasurementandanalysis