Cargando…

Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations

BACKGROUND: Progressive overload is a principle of resistance training exercise program design that typically relies on increasing load to increase neuromuscular demand to facilitate further adaptations. However, little attention has been given to another way of increasing demand—increasing the numb...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Plotkin, Daniel, Coleman, Max, Van Every, Derrick, Maldonado, Jaime, Oberlin, Douglas, Israetel, Michael, Feather, Jared, Alto, Andrew, Vigotsky, Andrew D., Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9528903/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199287
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14142
_version_ 1784801389292027904
author Plotkin, Daniel
Coleman, Max
Van Every, Derrick
Maldonado, Jaime
Oberlin, Douglas
Israetel, Michael
Feather, Jared
Alto, Andrew
Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
author_facet Plotkin, Daniel
Coleman, Max
Van Every, Derrick
Maldonado, Jaime
Oberlin, Douglas
Israetel, Michael
Feather, Jared
Alto, Andrew
Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
author_sort Plotkin, Daniel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Progressive overload is a principle of resistance training exercise program design that typically relies on increasing load to increase neuromuscular demand to facilitate further adaptations. However, little attention has been given to another way of increasing demand—increasing the number of repetitions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effects of two resistance training programs: (1) increasing load while keeping repetition range constant vs (2) increasing repetitions while keeping load constant. We aimed to compare the effects of these programs on lower body muscle hypertrophy, muscle strength, and muscle endurance in resistance-trained individuals over an 8-week study period. METHODS: Forty-three participants with at least 1 year of consistent lower body resistance training experience were randomly assigned to one of two experimental, parallel groups: A group that aimed to increase load while keeping repetitions constant (LOAD: n = 22; 13 men, nine women) or a group that aimed to increase repetitions while keeping load constant (REPS: n = 21; 14 men, seven women). Subjects performed four sets of four lower body exercises (back squat, leg extension, straight-leg calf raise, and seated calf raise) twice per week. We assessed one repetition maximum (1RM) in the Smith machine squat, muscular endurance in the leg extension, countermovement jump height, and muscle thickness along the quadriceps and calf muscles. Between-group effects were estimated using analyses of covariance, adjusted for pre-intervention scores and sex. RESULTS: Rectus femoris growth modestly favored REPS (adjusted effect estimate (CI(90%)), sum of sites: 2.8 mm [−0.5, 5.8]). Alternatively, dynamic strength increases slightly favored LOAD (2.0 kg [−2.4, 7.8]), with differences of questionable practical significance. No other notable between-group differences were found across outcomes (muscle thicknesses, <1 mm; endurance, <1%; countermovement jump, 0.1 cm; body fat, <1%; leg segmental lean mass, 0.1 kg), with narrow CIs for most outcomes. CONCLUSION: Both progressions of repetitions and load appear to be viable strategies for enhancing muscular adaptations over an 8-week training cycle, which provides trainers and trainees with another promising approach to programming resistance training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9528903
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95289032022-10-04 Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations Plotkin, Daniel Coleman, Max Van Every, Derrick Maldonado, Jaime Oberlin, Douglas Israetel, Michael Feather, Jared Alto, Andrew Vigotsky, Andrew D. Schoenfeld, Brad J. PeerJ Anatomy and Physiology BACKGROUND: Progressive overload is a principle of resistance training exercise program design that typically relies on increasing load to increase neuromuscular demand to facilitate further adaptations. However, little attention has been given to another way of increasing demand—increasing the number of repetitions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effects of two resistance training programs: (1) increasing load while keeping repetition range constant vs (2) increasing repetitions while keeping load constant. We aimed to compare the effects of these programs on lower body muscle hypertrophy, muscle strength, and muscle endurance in resistance-trained individuals over an 8-week study period. METHODS: Forty-three participants with at least 1 year of consistent lower body resistance training experience were randomly assigned to one of two experimental, parallel groups: A group that aimed to increase load while keeping repetitions constant (LOAD: n = 22; 13 men, nine women) or a group that aimed to increase repetitions while keeping load constant (REPS: n = 21; 14 men, seven women). Subjects performed four sets of four lower body exercises (back squat, leg extension, straight-leg calf raise, and seated calf raise) twice per week. We assessed one repetition maximum (1RM) in the Smith machine squat, muscular endurance in the leg extension, countermovement jump height, and muscle thickness along the quadriceps and calf muscles. Between-group effects were estimated using analyses of covariance, adjusted for pre-intervention scores and sex. RESULTS: Rectus femoris growth modestly favored REPS (adjusted effect estimate (CI(90%)), sum of sites: 2.8 mm [−0.5, 5.8]). Alternatively, dynamic strength increases slightly favored LOAD (2.0 kg [−2.4, 7.8]), with differences of questionable practical significance. No other notable between-group differences were found across outcomes (muscle thicknesses, <1 mm; endurance, <1%; countermovement jump, 0.1 cm; body fat, <1%; leg segmental lean mass, 0.1 kg), with narrow CIs for most outcomes. CONCLUSION: Both progressions of repetitions and load appear to be viable strategies for enhancing muscular adaptations over an 8-week training cycle, which provides trainers and trainees with another promising approach to programming resistance training. PeerJ Inc. 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9528903/ /pubmed/36199287 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14142 Text en © 2022 Plotkin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://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 Anatomy and Physiology
Plotkin, Daniel
Coleman, Max
Van Every, Derrick
Maldonado, Jaime
Oberlin, Douglas
Israetel, Michael
Feather, Jared
Alto, Andrew
Vigotsky, Andrew D.
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title_full Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title_fullStr Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title_full_unstemmed Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title_short Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
title_sort progressive overload without progressing load? the effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations
topic Anatomy and Physiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9528903/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199287
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14142
work_keys_str_mv AT plotkindaniel progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT colemanmax progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT vaneveryderrick progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT maldonadojaime progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT oberlindouglas progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT israetelmichael progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT featherjared progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT altoandrew progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT vigotskyandrewd progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations
AT schoenfeldbradj progressiveoverloadwithoutprogressingloadtheeffectsofloadorrepetitionprogressiononmuscularadaptations