Cargando…

The Effects of Low-Load Vs. High-Load Resistance Training on Muscle Fiber Hypertrophy: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type I and type II muscle fiber hypertrophy. Searches for studies were performed through ten databases. Studies were included if they: (a) compared the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Grgic, Jozo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sciendo 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7706639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33312275
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2020-0013
Descripción
Sumario:The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type I and type II muscle fiber hypertrophy. Searches for studies were performed through ten databases. Studies were included if they: (a) compared the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training (performed to momentary muscular failure); and, (b) assessed muscle fiber hypertrophy. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to analyze the data. Ten study groups were included in the analysis. In the meta-analysis for the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type I muscle fiber hypertrophy, there was no significant difference between the training conditions (standardized mean difference: 0.28; 95% confidence interval: –0.27, 0.82; p = 0.316; I(2) = 18%; 95% prediction interval: –0.71, 1.28). In the meta-analysis for the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type II muscle fiber hypertrophy, there was no significant difference between the training conditions (standardized mean difference: 0.30; 95% confidence interval: –0.05, 0.66; p = 0.089; I(2) = 0%; 95% prediction interval: –0.28, 0.88). In this meta-analysis, there were no significant differences between low-load and high-load resistance training on hypertrophy of type I or type II muscle fibers. The 95% confidence and prediction intervals were very wide, suggesting that the true effect in the population and the effect reported in a future study conducted on this topic could be in different directions and anywhere from trivial to very large. Therefore, there is a clear need for future research on this topic.