PDF herunterladen
Int J Sports Med 2024; 45(07): 504-510
DOI: 10.1055/a-2256-5857
Training & Testing

Effects of Resistance Training Overload Progression Protocols on Strength and Muscle Mass

Talisson Santos Chaves
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Maíra Camargo Scarpelli
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
João Guilherme Almeida Bergamasco
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Deivid Gomes da Silva
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Ricardo Alessandro Medalha Junior
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Nathalia Fernanda Dias
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Diego Bittencourt
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Paulo Cesar Carello Filho
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Vitor Angleri
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Sanmy Rocha Nóbrega
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Michael D. Roberts
2   School of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA
,
Carlos Ugrinowitsch 
3   School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
4   Department of Health Sciences and Human Performance, The University of Tampa, FL, USA
,
Cleiton Augusto Libardi 
1   MUSCULAB – Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos – UFSCar, São Carlos, Brazil
› Institutsangaben Funding Information Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico — http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003593; 311387/2021–7 Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo — http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001807; 2023/04739–2
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of progressive overload in resistance training on muscle strength and cross-sectional area (CSA) by specifically comparing the impact of increasing load (LOADprog) versus an increase in repetitions (REPSprog). We used a within-subject experimental design in which 39 previously untrained young persons (20 men and 19 women) had their legs randomized to LOADprog and REPSprog. Outcomes were assessed before and after 10 weeks of training. Muscle strength was assessed using the one repetition maximum (1RM) test on the leg extension exercise, and the CSA of the vastus lateralis was assessed by ultrasonography. Both protocols increased 1RM values from pre (LOADprog: 52.90±16.32 kg; REPSprog: 51.67±15.84 kg) to post (LOADprog: 69.05±18.55 kg, REPSprog: 66.82±17.95 kg), with no difference between them (P+>+0.05). Similarly, both protocols also increased in CSA values from pre (LOADprog: 21.34±4.71 cm²; REPSprog: 21.08±4.62 cm²) to post (LOADprog: 23.53±5.41 cm², REPSprog: 23.39±5.19 cm²), with no difference between them (P+>+0.05). In conclusion, our findings indicate that the progression of overload through load or repetitions can be used to promote gains in strength and muscle hypertrophy in young men and women in the early stages of training.

Keywords

muscle cross-sectional area - 1-RM - concentric muscle failure - strength training


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 29. Januar 2024

Angenommen: 29. Januar 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
29. Januar 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
12. März 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 ACSM. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 687-708
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Kraemer WJ. Strength training basics: Designing workouts to meet patients’ goals. Phys Sportsmed 2003; 31: 39-45
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kraemer WJ, Ratamess NA, French DN. Resistance training for health and performance. Curr Sports Med Rep 2002; 1: 165-171
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA, West DW. et al. Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2012; 113: 71-77
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Lasevicius T, Ugrinowitsch C, Schoenfeld BJ. et al. Effects of different intensities of resistance training with equated volume load on muscle strength and hypertrophy. Eur J Sport Sci 2018; 18: 772-780
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Nobrega SR, Ugrinowitsch C, Pintanel L. et al. Effect of Resistance Training to Muscle Failure vs. Volitional Interruption at High- and Low-Intensities on Muscle Mass and Strength. J Strength Cond Res 2018; 32: 162-169
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Nóbrega SR, Scarpelli MC, Barcelos C. et al. Muscle Hypertrophy Is Affected by Volume Load Progression Models. J Strength Cond Res 2023; 37: 62-67
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Lakens D, Caldwell AR. Simulation-Based Power Analysis for Factorial Analysis of Variance Designs 2021; 4: 1-14
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Angleri V, Ugrinowitsch C, Libardi CA. Crescent pyramid and drop-set systems do not promote greater strength gains, muscle hypertrophy, and changes on muscle architecture compared with traditional resistance training in well-trained men. Eur J Appl Physiol 2017; 117: 359-369
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Damas F, Angleri V, Phillips SM. et al. Myofibrillar protein synthesis and muscle hypertrophy individualized responses to systematically changing resistance training variables in trained young men. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2019; 127: 806-815
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Chaves TS, Biazon TMPC, Santos LME. et al. Effects of resistance training with controlled versus self-selected repetition duration on muscle mass and strength in untrained men. Peerj 2020; 8: e8697
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Santanielo N, Nobrega SR, Scarpelli MC. et al. Effect of resistance training to muscle failure vs non-failure on strength, hypertrophy and muscle architecture in trained individuals. Biol Sport 2020; 37: 333-341
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Angleri V, Damas F, Phillips SM. et al. Resistance training variable manipulations are less relevant than intrinsic biology in affecting muscle fiber hypertrophy. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2022; 32: 821-832
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Association WM. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Jama 2013; 310: 2191-2194
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Chung B, Pandis N, Scherer RW. et al. CONSORT Extension for Within-Person Randomized Clinical Trials. J Dent Res 2020; 99: 121-124
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 MacInnis MJ, McGlory C, Gibala MJ. et al. Investigating human skeletal muscle physiology with unilateral exercise models: When one limb is more powerful than two. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2017; 42: 563-570
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Broglio K. Randomization in Clinical Trials: Permuted Blocks and Stratification. JAMA 2018; 319: 2223-2224
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Dallal J. Randomization.com (2007) In Internet: www.jerrydallal.com/random/randomize.htm (Accessed July 10, 2022)
    PubMed
  • 19 Schoenfeld BJ, James F, Jozo G. et al. Resistance Training Recommendations to Maximize Muscle Hypertrophy in an Athletic Population: Position Stand of the IUSCA. Int J Strength Cond 2021; 1: 1-30
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Lixandrao ME, Ugrinowitsch C, Bottaro M. et al. Vastus lateralis muscle cross-sectional area ultrasonography validity for image fitting in humans. J Strength Cond Res 2014; 28: 3293-3297
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Damas F, Phillips SM, Lixandrao ME. et al. Early resistance training-induced increases in muscle cross-sectional area are concomitant with edema-induced muscle swelling. Eur J Appl Physiol 2016; 116: 49-56
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Newton MJ, Morgan GT, Sacco P. et al. Comparison of responses to strenuous eccentric exercise of the elbow flexors between resistance-trained and untrained men. J Strength Cond Res 2008; 22: 597-607
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Reeves ND, Maganaris CN, Narici MV. Ultrasonographic assessment of human skeletal muscle size. Eur J Appl Physiol 2004; 91: 116-118
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Brown LE, Weir JP, Brown L. et al. ASEP Procedures Recommendation I: Accurate Assessment of Muscular Strength and Power. J Exerc Physiol 2001; 4: 1-21
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Kelley K, Preacher KJ. On effect size. Psychological Methods 2012; 17: 137-152
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Abe T, DeHoyos DV, Pollock ML. et al. Time course for strength and muscle thickness changes following upper and lower body resistance training in men and women. Eur J Appl Physiol 2000; 81: 174-180
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Ahtiainen JP, Walker S, Peltonen H. et al. Heterogeneity in resistance training-induced muscle strength and mass responses in men and women of different ages. Age (Dordr) 2016; 38: 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Colliander EB, Tesch PA. Responses to eccentric and concentric resistance training in females and males. Acta Physiol Scand 1991; 141: 149-156
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Cureton KJ, Collins MA, Hill DW. et al. Muscle hypertrophy in men and women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20: 338-344
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Ivey FM, Tracy BL, Lemmer JT. et al. Effects of strength training and detraining on muscle quality: age and gender comparisons. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000; 55: B152-B157
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Carvalho L, Junior RM, Barreira J. et al. Muscle hypertrophy and strength gains after resistance training with different volume-matched loads: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2022; 47: 357-368
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Lopez P, Radaelli R, Taaffe DR. et al. Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2021; 53: 1206-1216
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Lacio M, Vieira JG, Trybulski R. et al. Effects of Resistance Training Performed with Different Loads in Untrained and Trained Male Adult Individuals on Maximal Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 1-19
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Refalo MC, Hamilton DL, Paval DR. et al. Influence of resistance training load on measures of skeletal muscle hypertrophy and improvements in maximal strength and neuromuscular task performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci 2021; 39: 1723-1745
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Ogborn D. et al. Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations Between Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 3508-3523
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 36 Plotkin D, Coleman M, Van Every D. et al. Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations. PeerJ 2022; 10: e14142
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 37 Barcelos C, Damas F, Nobrega SR. et al. High-frequency resistance training does not promote greater muscular adaptations compared to low frequencies in young untrained men. Eur J Sport Sci 2018; 18: 1077-1082
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 38 Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Ogborn D. et al. Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations between Low- Vs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 3508-3523
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 39 Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Contreras B. et al. A Comparison of Increases in Volume Load Over 8 Weeks of Low-Versus High-Load Resistance Training. Asian J Sports Med 2016; 7: e29247
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 40 Altman N, Krzywinski M. Association, correlation and causation. Nat Methods 2015; 12: 899-900
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar