Cargando…

Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Greater muscular strength is generally associated with superior sports performance, for example, in jumping, sprinting, and throwing. This meta-analysis aims to compare the effects of variable-resistance training (VRT) and constant-resistance training (CRT) on the maximum strength of trained and unt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Yiguan, Xu, Yangyang, Hong, Feng, Li, Junbo, Ye, Weibing, Korivi, Mallikarjuna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9317775/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35886409
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148559
_version_ 1784755138721742848
author Lin, Yiguan
Xu, Yangyang
Hong, Feng
Li, Junbo
Ye, Weibing
Korivi, Mallikarjuna
author_facet Lin, Yiguan
Xu, Yangyang
Hong, Feng
Li, Junbo
Ye, Weibing
Korivi, Mallikarjuna
author_sort Lin, Yiguan
collection PubMed
description Greater muscular strength is generally associated with superior sports performance, for example, in jumping, sprinting, and throwing. This meta-analysis aims to compare the effects of variable-resistance training (VRT) and constant-resistance training (CRT) on the maximum strength of trained and untrained subjects. PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were comprehensively searched to identify relevant studies published up to January 2022. Fourteen studies that met the inclusion criteria were used for the systematic review and meta-analysis. Data regarding training status, training modality, and type of outcome measure were extracted for the analyses. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The pooled outcome showed improved maximum strength with VRT, which was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.42–1.19) for all the subjects. In addition, trained subjects experienced greater maximum-strength improvements with VRT than with CRT (ES = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.22–0.93). Based on subgroup analyses, maximum-strength improvement with a VRT load of ≥80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.37–1.16) in trained subjects, while no significant differences were found between VRT and CRT for maximum-strength improvement when the load was <80% (ES = 0.00; 95% CI: −0.55–0.55). The untrained subjects also achieved greater maximum strength with VRT than with CRT (ES = 1.34; 95% CI: 0.28–2.40). Interestingly, the improved maximum strength of untrained subjects with a VRT load of <80% of 1RM was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 2.38; 95% CI: 1.39–3.36); however, no significant differences were noted between VRT and CRT when the load was ≥80% of 1RM (ES = −0.04; 95% CI: −0.89–0.81). Our findings show that subjects with resistance training experience could use a load of ≥80% of 1RM and subjects without resistance training experience could use a load of <80% of 1RM to obtain greater VRT benefits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9317775
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93177752022-07-27 Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Lin, Yiguan Xu, Yangyang Hong, Feng Li, Junbo Ye, Weibing Korivi, Mallikarjuna Int J Environ Res Public Health Review Greater muscular strength is generally associated with superior sports performance, for example, in jumping, sprinting, and throwing. This meta-analysis aims to compare the effects of variable-resistance training (VRT) and constant-resistance training (CRT) on the maximum strength of trained and untrained subjects. PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were comprehensively searched to identify relevant studies published up to January 2022. Fourteen studies that met the inclusion criteria were used for the systematic review and meta-analysis. Data regarding training status, training modality, and type of outcome measure were extracted for the analyses. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The pooled outcome showed improved maximum strength with VRT, which was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.42–1.19) for all the subjects. In addition, trained subjects experienced greater maximum-strength improvements with VRT than with CRT (ES = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.22–0.93). Based on subgroup analyses, maximum-strength improvement with a VRT load of ≥80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.37–1.16) in trained subjects, while no significant differences were found between VRT and CRT for maximum-strength improvement when the load was <80% (ES = 0.00; 95% CI: −0.55–0.55). The untrained subjects also achieved greater maximum strength with VRT than with CRT (ES = 1.34; 95% CI: 0.28–2.40). Interestingly, the improved maximum strength of untrained subjects with a VRT load of <80% of 1RM was significantly higher than that with CRT (ES = 2.38; 95% CI: 1.39–3.36); however, no significant differences were noted between VRT and CRT when the load was ≥80% of 1RM (ES = −0.04; 95% CI: −0.89–0.81). Our findings show that subjects with resistance training experience could use a load of ≥80% of 1RM and subjects without resistance training experience could use a load of <80% of 1RM to obtain greater VRT benefits. MDPI 2022-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9317775/ /pubmed/35886409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148559 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Lin, Yiguan
Xu, Yangyang
Hong, Feng
Li, Junbo
Ye, Weibing
Korivi, Mallikarjuna
Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Effects of Variable-Resistance Training Versus Constant-Resistance Training on Maximum Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort effects of variable-resistance training versus constant-resistance training on maximum strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9317775/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35886409
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148559
work_keys_str_mv AT linyiguan effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xuyangyang effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hongfeng effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lijunbo effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yeweibing effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT korivimallikarjuna effectsofvariableresistancetrainingversusconstantresistancetrainingonmaximumstrengthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis