Effects of Different Weekly Set Volumes on Strength and Perceptual Responses in Athletes

This study investigated the effects of different resistance training (RT) volumes quantified by weekly sets at high intensity (load and effort) on dynamic strength adaptations and psychophysiological responses in trained individuals. Twenty-four athletes were randomly allocated to three groups that performed three (3 S, n=8), six (6 S, n=8), and nine (9 S, n=8) weekly sets, respectively, three times a week on the barbell back squat and bench press during an 8-week period. While all groups showcased strength gains (p<0.05), post hoc comparisons revealed that 6 S and 9 S elicited greater strength adaptations than 3 S in barbell back squat (p=0.027 and p=0.004, respectively) and bench press (p=0.001 and p=0.044, respectively). There were no differences between 6 S and 9 S conditions for back squat (p=0.999) and bench press (p=0.378). Although a time effect was observed for Session-RPE (p=0.014) and Total Quality Recovery scale (p=0.020), psychophysiological responses were similar among groups. Our findings suggest that performing six and nine weekly sets at high intensities led to greater strength gains compared to three weekly sets in strength-trained individuals, despite similar psychophysiological responses.

A Mixed Methods Feasibility Study of Machine-Based Resistance Training With Prefrail Older Adults in Residential Care: The Keeping Active in Residential Elderly Trial II

Physical activity is an effective, proactive intervention to reduce or reverse frailty and functional decline. However, uncertainty exists about the feasibility and impact of resistance training on multidimensional health in prefrail older adults in residential care. This mixed methods feasibility study assessed practicability with limited efficacy testing on health and functional outcomes. Eleven prefrail older adults participated in a 6-week progressive resistance training protocol three times per week. The intervention and measures were found to be appropriate and acceptable by those who completed the trial, with participants self-reporting improved well-being, mood, and function. Analysis identified several barriers to recruitment, including prior commitments, seasonal impact, and session timing, and offered potential solutions with further recommendations for program refinement prior to a definitive randomized controlled trial. These findings add to our understanding of prefrail older adults' preferences regarding participation in physical activity research and the perceived benefits of resistance training. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03141879.

Muscular Adaptations and Psychophysiological Responses in Resistance Training Systems

Purpose: We investigated the effect of drop-set (DS) and rest-pause (RP) systems compared to traditional (TRAD) resistance training on muscular adaptations and psychophysiological responses. Methods: Twenty-seven trained men (age: 23.4 ± 3.4 years; resistance training experience: 5.1 ± 1.7 years) were assigned to experimental groups (DS: n = 9, 3 × 10 repetitions at 75% with 6 additional repetitions at 55% 1RM; RP: n = 9, 3 × 16 repetitions at 75% 1RM; TRAD: n = 9, 4 × 12 repetitions at 70% 1RM) and performed lower-limb training sessions twice a week for 8 weeks. Maximum dynamic strength (1RM) and localized muscular endurance (LME) tests were performed in 45° leg press at baseline and post intervention. Session-RPE was assessed 15 min after the end of each training session. Results: A significant time vs. group interaction was observed for 1RM (p = .012) and LME (p < .0001). Post hoc comparisons revealed that RP elicited greater gains in muscular strength than DS (p = .044) but not TRAD (p = .116); and DS elicited greater LME than RP (p < .001) and TRAD (p = .001). No statistical differences were observed in Session-RPE and training strain between conditions; however, RP promoted higher training monotony (p = .036) than DS and TRAD. Conclusions: The DS and RP systems have a potential role in training programs aiming to promote muscle strength and localized muscular endurance adaptations, respectively. However, RP may promote higher training monotony than DS and TRAD, even though the other psychophysiological responses are similar.

Drop-Set Resistance Training versus Pyramidal and Traditional Sets Elicits Greater Psychophysiological Responses in Men

We compared the effects of resistance training (ResisT) to pyramidal and traditional weightlifting sets on men's psychophysiological responses. In a randomized crossover design, 24 resistance-trained males performed drop-set, descending pyramid, and traditional ResisT in the barbell back squat, 45° leg press, and seated knee extension. We assessed participants' rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and feelings of pleasure/displeasure (FPD) at the end of each set and at 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes post-session. No differences were detected across ResisT Methods in total training volume (p = 0.180). Post hoc comparisons revealed that drop-set training elicited higher RPE (M 8.8 SD 0.7 arbitrary units) and lower FPD (M -1.4 SD 1.5 arbitrary units) values compared to descending pyramid (M Set RPE 8.0 SD 0.9 arbitrary units and M Set FPD 0.4 SD 1.6 arbitrary units) and traditional set (M Set RPE 7.5 SD 1.1 arbitrary units and M Set FPD 1.3 SD 1.2 arbitrary units) schemes (p < 0.05). In addition, drop-set training elicited higher session RPE (M 8.1 SD 0.8 arbitrary units) and lower session FPD (M 0.2 SD 1.4 arbitrary units) values than descending pyramid and traditional ResisT (p < 0.001). Similarly, descending pyramid training elicited higher session RPE (M 6.6 SD 0.9 arbitrary units) and lower session FPD (M 1.2 SD 1.4 arbitrary units) than traditional set (M Session RPE 5.9 SD 0.8 arbitrary units and M Session FPD 1.5 SD 1.2 arbitrary units) training (p = 0.015). No differences were found in the temporality of post-session metrics, suggesting that testing 10 and 15 minutes post-ResisT was sufficient to assess session RPE (p = 0.480) and session FPD (p = 0.855), respectively. In conclusion, even with similar total training volume, drop-set training elicited more pronounced psychophysiological responses than either pyramidal or traditional ResisT in resistance-trained males.

An elusive consensus definition of sarcopenia impedes research and clinical treatment: A narrative review

The definition of sarcopenia, the age-related loss of muscle mass, has evolved since the term's inception and yet there is no consensus. Many of the identified definitions of sarcopenia centre their criteria around the loss of muscle mass, loss of function, and weakness. Common variables to various definitions of sarcopenia are appendicular lean soft tissue mass (often called muscle mass), grip strength, and gait speed. However, a lack of consensus remains among operational definitions and diagnostics for this newly recognized disease and may be attributed to the absence of appropriate tools that accurately measure the outcomes of interest, such as skeletal muscle instead of lean mass. In this narrative review, we describe the evolution of the consensus groups' definition of sarcopenia, address the need for more accurate measures of muscle mass and function, and effective, low-cost treatments (i.e., resistance training and diet) for this disease. Consensus on what constitutes sarcopenia is critical to propel research in the field and, importantly, provide what prognostic value a sarcopenia diagnosis provides and how such a patient would be treated.

Resistance training improves cognitive function in older adults with different cognitive status: a systematic review and Meta-analysis

The present study investigated the impact of resistance training (RT) on cognitive function in older adults with different cognitive status by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies. We performed a literature search with no restriction on publication year in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and AgeLine from inception up to August 2020. Experimental studies investigating the impact of RT on the cognitive function of cognitively healthy (CH) and cognitively impaired (CI) older adults (≥60 years) were included for analysis. Eighteen studies were included in the final analysis, of which ten studies investigated CH community-dwelling older adult, seven studies investigated CI older adults, and one study investigated both. RT significantly improved overall cognitive function in both CH (SMD = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.00 to 1.08, P = 0.047) and CI (SMD = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.21 to 1.16, P = 0.005) older adults. However, short-term memory was only improved in CH older adults (MD = -0.20; 95% CI = -0.25 to -0.15, P < 0.00001). In conclusion, RT improved overall cognitive function in CH and CI older adults, whereas short-term memory, assessed by the digit span of the WAIS III, was only significantly improved in CH older adults.

A Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial Evaluating a Resistance Training Intervention With Frail Older Adults in Residential Care: The Keeping Active in Residential Elderly Trial

Frailty is associated with negative health outcomes, disability, and mortality. Physical activity is an effective intervention to improve functional health status. However, the effect of resistance training on multidimensional health in frail older adults remains unclear. This randomized controlled trial was conducted in a U.K. residential care home to assess feasibility with limited efficacy testing on health and functional outcomes and to inform a future definitive randomized controlled trial. Eleven frail older adults (>65 years) completed a 6-week machine-based resistance training protocol three times a week. Uptake and retention were greater than 80%. The measures and intervention were found to be acceptable and practicable. The analyses indicated large improvements in functional capacity, frailty, and strength in the intervention group compared with the controls. These findings support the feasibility of a definitive randomized controlled trial and reinforce the value of resistance training in this population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03141879.