Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2021; 42(01): 82-89
DOI: 10.1055/a-1219-7750
Training & Testing

Parasympathetic Nervous Activity Responses to Different Resistance Training Systems

Witalo Kassiano 
1   Metabolism, Nutrition and Exercise Laboratory, Physical Education and Sport Center, Londrina State University, Londrina, Brazil
,
Bruna Daniella de Vasconcelos Costa
1   Metabolism, Nutrition and Exercise Laboratory, Physical Education and Sport Center, Londrina State University, Londrina, Brazil
,
Daltonde Lima-Júnior
2   Department of Physical Education of Federal Univerity of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil
,
Petrus Gantois 
2   Department of Physical Education of Federal Univerity of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil
,
Fabiano de Souza Fonseca 
3   Department of Physical Education of Federal Rural University of Pernambuco, Brazil
,
Manoel da Cunha Costa
4   Human Performance Laboratory, State University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil
,
Leonardo de Sousa Fortes
2   Department of Physical Education of Federal Univerity of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The assessment of parasympathetic nervous activity and psychophysiological responses infers the stress imposed by different resistance training systems. Therefore, we compare the effects of different sets configurations, with similar volume (~60 repetitions), on heart rate variability indices and internal training load. Twenty-nine resistance-trained adults completed the following conditions: traditional without and with muscle failure, inter-repetition rest, and rest-pause in the parallel squat. The heart rate variability indices (time-domain) were measured before and 30 min after each condition. The internal training load was obtained through the session-rating of perceived exertion method. Except for inter-repetition rest, all conditions reduced the heart rate variability indices after the session (P<0.05), and the rest-pause triggered the higher reductions (≤−46.7%). The internal training load was higher in the rest-pause (≤68.9%). Our results suggest that rest-pause configuration leads to more considerable disruption of the parasympathetic nervous activity and higher internal training load in trained adults. In contrast, inter-repetition rest allows lower autonomic and psychophysiological stress.

Key words

strength training - autonomic nervous system - central fatigue - rating of perceived exertion


Publication History

Received: 20 March 2020

Accepted: 26 June 2020

Article published online:
25 August 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

 

  • References

  • 1 Scott BR, Duthie GM, Thorrnton HR. et al. Training monitoring for resistance exercise: Theory and applications. Sports Med 2016; 46: 687-698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cunanan AJ, DeWeese BH, Wagle JP. et al. The general adaptation syndrome: A foundation for the concept of periodization. Sports Med 2018; 48: 787-797 DOI: 10.1007/s40279-017-0855-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Chen J-L, Yeh D-P, Lee J-P. et al. Parasympathetic nervous activity mirrors recovery status in weightlifting performance after training. J Strength Cond Res 2011; 25: 1546-1552. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181da7858.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Paz GA, Iglesias-Soler E, Willardson JM. et al. Postexercise hypotension and heart rate variability responses subsequent to traditional, paired set, and superset training methods. J Strength Cond Res 2019; 33: 2433-2442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Marshall PW, Robbins DA, Wrightson AW. et al. Acute neuromuscular and fatigue responses to the res t-pause method. J Sci Med Sport 2012; 15: 153-158 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.08.003.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Costa BDV, Ferreira MEC, Gantois P. et al. Acute effect of drop-set, traditional, and pyramidal systems in resistance training on neuromuscular performance in trained adults. J Strength Cond Res 2019; [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000003150.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Figueiredo VC, de Salles BF, Trajano GS. Volume for muscle hypertrophy and health outcomes: the most effective variable in resistance training. Sports Med 2017; 48: 499-505 doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0793-0
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Latella C, Teo WP, Drinkwater EJ. et al. The acute neuromuscular responses to cluster set resistance training: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med 2019; 49: 1861-1877 DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01172-z.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mayo X, Iglesias-Soler E, Fariñas-Rodríguez J. et al. Exercise type affects cardiac vagal autonomic recovery after a resistance training session. J Strength Cond Res 2016; 30: 2565-2573 DOI: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000001347.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mayo X, Iglesias-Soler E, Carballeira-Fernandez E. et al. A shorter set reduces the loss of cardiac autonomic and baroreflex control after resistance exercise. Eur J Sport Sci 2016; 16: 996-1004 DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2015.1108367.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Harriss DJ, MacSween A, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2020 update. Int J Sports Med 2019; 40: 813-817. doi:10.1055/a-1015-3123
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Laurent CM, Green JM, Bishop PA. et al. A practical approach to monitoring recovery: Development of a perceived recovery status scale. J Strength Cond Res 2011; 25: 620-628
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Eletrophysiology Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use. Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 354-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Perrotta AS, Jeklin AT, Hives BA. et al. Validity of the elite HRV smartphone application for examining heart rate variability in a field-based setting. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 2296-2302 DOI: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000001841.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Fang Y, Sun J, Li C. et al. Effect of different breathing patterns on nonlinearity of heart rate variability. In: 2008 30th Annual International Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008; 2008: 3220-3223
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Araujo JA, Pecanha T, Novelli FI. et al. Reproducibility of heart rate variability indices at post-maximal exercise. Int J Sports Med 2020; 41: 512-519
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 McGuigan MR, Foster C. A new approach to monitoring resistance training. Strength Cond J 2004; 26: 42-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Singh F, Foster C, Tod D. et al. Monitoring different types of resistance training using session rating of perceived exertion. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2007; 2: 34-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Robertson RJ, Goss FL, Rutkowski J. et al. Concurrent validation of the OMNI perceived exertion scale for resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003; 35: 333-341 DOI: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000048831.15016.2A.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Dankel SJ, Loenneke JP. Effect sizes for paired data should use the change score variability rather than the pre-test variability. J Strength Cond Res 2018; DOI: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000002946.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Stanley J, Peake JM, Buchheit M. Cardiac parasympathetic reactivation following exercise: implications for training prescription. Sports Med 2013; 43: 1259-1277 doi:10.1007/s40279-013-0083-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kingsley JD, Figueroa A. Acute and training effects of resistance exercise on heart rate variability. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2016; 36: 179-187 doi:10.1111/cpf.12223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gonzalez-Badillo JJ, Rodriguez-Rosell D, Sanchez-Medina L. et al. Short-term recovery following resistance exercise leading or not to failure. Int J Sports Med 2016; 37: 295-304 DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1564254.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Pareja-Blanco F, Rodriguez-Rosell D, Sanchez-Medina L. et al. Acute and delayed response to resistance exercise leading or not leading to muscle failure. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2017; 37: 630-639 DOI: 10.1111/cpf.12348.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Iglesias-Soler E, Boullosa DA, Carballeira E. et al. Effect of set configuration on hemodynamics and cardiac autonomic modulation after high-intensity squat exercise. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2015; 35: 250-257. DOI: 10.1111/cpf.12158.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Rio-Rodriguez D, Iglesias-Soler E, Fernandez Del Olmo M. Set configuration in resistance exercise: muscle fatigue and cardiovascular effects. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0151163 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0151163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Marcora S. Perception of effort during exercise is independent of afferent feedback from skeletal muscles, heart, and lungs. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2009; 106: 2060-2062. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.90378.2008
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Prasartwuth O, Allen TJ, Butler JE. et al. Length-dependent changes in voluntary activation, maximum voluntary torque and twitch responses after eccentric damage in humans. J Physiol 2006; 571: 243-252. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2005.101600.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR. et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011; 43: 1334-1359 DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar