Effect of Resistance Exercise Order on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Older Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial

We compared the effects of two specific resistance training (RT) exercise orders on cardiovascular risk factors. Forty-four untrained older women (>60 years) were randomly assigned to three groups: control (CON, n = 15), multi-joint to single-joint (MJ-SJ, n = 14), and single-joint to multi-joint (SJ-MJ, n = 15) exercise orders. Training groups performed a whole-body RT program (eight exercises, 3 × 10−15 repetitions for each exercise) over 12 weeks in 3 days/week. Body fat, triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL-c, LDL-c, VLDL-c, glucose, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, C-reactive protein, total radical-trapping antioxidant (TRAP), advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP), ferrous oxidation-xylenol (FOX), and nitric oxide concentrations (NOx) were determined pre- and post-intervention. Significant interaction group × time (p < 0.05) revealed reducing fat mass and trunk fat and improvements in glucose, LDL-c, IL-10, TNF-α, C-reactive protein, FOX, and AOPP concentrations in both training groups, without differences between them (p > 0.05). The results suggest that 12 weeks of RT, regardless of exercise order, elicit positive adaptations on body fat and metabolic biomarkers similarly in older women.

Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports: Emphasis on Strength-Power Training-A Provocative and Challenging Narrative

ABSTRACT

Stone, MH, Hornsby, WG, Haff, GG, Fry, AC, Suarez, DG, Liu, J, Gonzalez-Rave, JM, and Pierce, KC. Periodization and block periodization in sports: emphasis on strength-power training-a provocative and challenging narrative. J Strength Cond Res 35(8): 2351-2371, 2021-Periodization can be defined as a logical sequential, phasic method of manipulating fitness and recovery phases to increase the potential for achieving specific performance goals while minimizing the potential for nonfunctional over-reaching, overtraining, and injury. Periodization deals with the micromanagement of timelines and fitness phases and is cyclic in nature. On the other hand, programming deals with the micromanagement of the training process and deals with exercise selection, volume, intensity, etc. Evidence indicates that a periodized training process coupled with appropriate programming can produce superior athletic enhancement compared with nonperiodized process. There are 2 models of periodization, traditional and block. Traditional can take different forms (i.e., reverse). Block periodization has 2 subtypes, single goal or factor (individual sports) and multiple goals or factors (team sports). Both models have strengths and weaknesses but can be "tailored" through creative programming to produce excellent results for specific sports.

What is the traditional method of resistance training: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Many resistance studies state that they used the traditional method of resistance training in the intervention. However, there is a wide difference on the characteristics of the training protocols used even though they are labeled as "the traditional method". There is no clear definition and characteristics for the traditional method of resistance training.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the most common definitions and references, and also the main characteristics of the training variables of the studies using the traditional training method for strengthening.

DATABASE

Searches were carried out in Pubmed, Embase, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials that included a strengthening program using the "traditional method" and that evaluated hypertrophy and/or maximum strength in healthy individuals.

RESULT

The initial search resulted in 26,057 studies, but only 39 studies were eligible and included in this review. The common characteristics of the traditional training protocol were frequency of 3 sessions/week, 3 sets of 9 repetitions, with weight = 75% 1RM. The movement time was 2±1 seconds for the concentric and for the eccentric phases. Resting time between sets was 2±1 minutes. The concepts used to define the method as traditional and the characteristics of the intervention protocols were different. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) was the most cited reference.

CONCLUSIONS

The "traditional method of resistance training" can be defined as: "Three (±1) sets of 9±6 repetitions of concentric and eccentric exercises using an external load of 75±20% of one maximum repetition, completed 3±1 times/week.

Influence of Resistance Training Exercise Order on Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Anabolic Hormones in Older Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Tomeleri, CM, Ribeiro, AS, Nunes, JP, Schoenfeld, BJ, Souza, MF, Schiavoni, D, Junior, PS, Cavaglieri, CR, Cunha, PM, Venturini, D, Barbosa, DS, and Cyrino, ES. Influence of resistance training exercise order on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and anabolic hormones in older women: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res 34(11): 3103-3109, 2020-The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of resistance training (RT) exercise order on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and anabolic hormones in older women. Forty-four older women were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: a nonexercise control group (CON, n = 15) and two RT groups that performed a 12-week RT program in a multijoint to single-joint order (MJ-SJ, n = 14), or in a single-joint to multijoint order (SJ-MJ, n = 15). The RT protocol (3×/week) encompassed 8 exercises, with 3 sets of 10-15 repetitions performed per exercise. One repetition maximum tests were used to evaluate muscle strength; dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to estimate lean soft tissue. Both training groups showed significant and similar increases in muscle strength (MJ-SJ = 16.4%; SJ-MJ = 12.7%) and mass (MJ-SJ = 7.5%; SJ-MJ = 6.1%), whereas there were no significant changes in testosterone and insulin-like growth factor 1. The results suggest that both approaches are similarly effective in eliciting morphofunctional improvements in older women.

Varying the Order of Combinations of Single- and Multi-Joint Exercises Differentially Affects Resistance Training Adaptations

Brandão, L, de Salles Painelli, V, Lasevicius, T, Silva-Batista, C, Brendon, H, Schoenfeld, BJ, Aihara, AY, Cardoso, FN, de Almeida Peres, B, and Teixeira, EL. Varying the order of combinations of single- and multi-joint exercises differentially affects resistance training adaptations. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1254-1263, 2020-Our study aimed to compare the effects of multi-joint (MJ) and single-joint (SJ) exercises, either isolated or in combination, and in different orders, on cross-sectional area (CSA) of the pectoralis major (PM) and different heads of the triceps brachii (TB), as well as on the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) in the bench press and lying barbell triceps press. Forty-three young men were randomly assigned to one of 4 possible RT protocols: barbell bench press plus lying barbell triceps press (MJ + SJ, n = 12); lying barbell triceps press plus barbell bench press (SJ + MJ, n = 10); barbell bench press (MJ, n = 10); or lying barbell triceps press (SJ, n = 11). Results showed significant within-group increases in 1-RM bench press for MJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ but not for SJ. Conversely, significantly greater within-group increases in elbow extension 1-RM were noted for SJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ but not for MJ. Significantly greater increases in PM CSA were observed for MJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ compared with SJ. Significant increases in TB CSA were noted for SJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ, but not for MJ, without observed between-group differences. Individual analysis of TB heads showed significantly greater CSA increases in the lateral head for MJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ compared with SJ. Alternatively, significantly greater increases in the long head were observed for SJ, MJ + SJ, and SJ + MJ compared with MJ. CSA increases for the medial head were statistically similar between conditions. Our findings indicate that muscular adaptations are differentially affected by performance of MJ and SJ exercises.

What influence does resistance exercise order have on muscular strength gains and muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The objectives of this paper were to: (a) systematically review studies that explored the effects of exercise order (EO) on muscular strength and/or hypertrophy; (b) pool their results using a meta-analysis; and (c) provide recommendations for the prescription of EO in resistance training (RT) programmes. A literature search was performed in four databases. Studies were included if they explored the effects of EO on dynamic muscular strength and/or muscle hypertrophy. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with Hedges' g effect size (ES). The methodological quality of studies was appraised using the TESTEX checklist. Eleven good-to-excellent methodological quality studies were included in the review. When all strength tests, that is, both in multi-joint (MJ) and single-joint (SJ) exercises were considered, there was no difference between the EOs (ES = -0.11; p = 0.306). However, there was a difference between the MJ-to-SJ and SJ-to-MJ orders for strength gains in the MJ exercises, favouring starting the exercise session with MJ exercises (ES = 0.32; p = 0.034), and the strength gains in the SJ exercises, favouring starting the exercise session with SJ exercises (ES = -0.58; p = 0.032). No significant effect of EO was observed for hypertrophy combining site-specific and indirect measures (ES = 0.03; p = 0.862). In conclusion, increases in muscular strength are the largest in the exercises performed at the beginning of an exercise session. For muscle hypertrophy, our meta-analysis indicated that both MJ-to-SJ and SJ-to-MJ EOs may produce similar results.