Effect of Resistance Training Frequency on Neuromuscular Performance and Muscle Morphology After 8 Weeks in Trained Men

Increasing set volume relative to baseline does not augment skeletal muscle adaptations when compared to maintenance of baseline training volume in recreationally trained individuals

PURPOSE

This study compared the effects of prescribing an increased number of sets relative to baseline (ITV) to a maintenance of baseline training volume (BTV), in previously trained individuals.

METHODS

Forty-two adults with more than 6 months of elbow flexion resistance training experience had each arm randomized to either the ITV or BTV condition. Participants performed 2-weekly sessions of unilateral standing dumbbell elbow flexion exercise for 12 weeks, 8 of which were supervised. Muscle thickness of the elbow flexors at 50, 60, and 70% the distance of the upper arm and one repetition-maximum (1RM) strength for the unilateral standing dumbbell elbow flexion exercise were assessed pre- and post-intervention.

RESULTS

For the 50% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = 0.022 (95% CI - 0.096, 0.140)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For the 60% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = - 0.010 (95% CI - 0.155, 0.96)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For the 70% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = 0.004 (95% CI - 0.092, 0.101)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For changes in 1RM, there was evidence that the change was greater in the BTV [∆BTV vs ∆Control (kg) = 1.915 (95% CI 1.219, 2.611)] and ITV [∆ITV vs ∆Control (kg) = 1.780 (95% CI 1.084, 2.475)] conditions compared to control.

CONCLUSION

Prescribing an increased dose of sets relative to baseline did not augment muscular adaptations when compared to a maintenance of BTV, in recreationally trained individuals. Both training conditions were similarly effective in promoting significant increases in muscle thickness and 1RM strength of the elbow flexors.

Progression of total training volume in resistance training studies and its application to skeletal muscle growth

Progressive overload describes the gradual increase of stress placed on the body during exercise training, and is often quantified (i.e. in resistance training studies) through increases in total training volume (i.e. sets × repetitions × load) from the first to final week of the exercise training intervention. Within the literature, it has become increasingly common for authors to discuss skeletal muscle growth adaptations in the context of increases in total training volume (i.e. the magnitude progression in total training volume). The present manuscript discusses a physiological rationale for progressive overload and then explains why, in our opinion, quantifying the progression of total training volume within research investigations tells very little about muscle growth adaptations to resistance training. Our opinion is based on the following research findings: (1) a noncausal connection between increases in total training volume (i.e. progressively overloading the resistance exercise stimulus) and increases in skeletal muscle size; (2) similar changes in total training volume may not always produce similar increases in muscle size; and (3) the ability to exercise more and consequently amass larger increases in total training volume may not inherently produce more skeletal muscle growth. The methodology of quantifying changes in total training volume may therefore provide a means through which researchers can mathematically determine the total amount of external 'work' performed within a resistance training study. It may not, however, always explain muscle growth adaptations.

Resistance Exercise Sessions Comprising Multijoint vs. Single-Joint Exercises Result in Similar Metabolic and Hormonal Responses, But Distinct Levels of Muscle Damage in Trained Men

ABSTRACT

Barbosa, PH, Bueno de Camargo, JB, Jonas de Oliveira, J, Reis Barbosa, CG, Santos da Silva, A, Dos-Santos, JW, Verlengia, R, Barreira, J, Braz, TV, and Lopes, CR. Resistance exercise sessions comprising multijoint vs. single-joint exercises result in similar metabolic and hormonal responses, but distinct levels of muscle damage in trained men. J Strength Cond Res 38(5): 842-847, 2024-Resistance-type exercise (RE) elicits distinct acute metabolic and hormonal responses, which can be modulated by the manipulation of training variables. The purpose of this study was to compare the metabolic (blood lactate and estimated lactic anaerobic system energy expenditure) and hormonal (growth hormone [GH]) responses to RE sessions composed exclusively of multijoint (MULTI) or single-joint (SINGLE) exercises. Assessments of creatine kinase (CK) levels were also performed. In a crossover design, 10 recreationally resistance-trained men (age: 26.9 ± 3.0 years, total body mass: 83.2 ± 13.8 kg; height: 176 ± 7.0 cm; training experience: 5.5 ± 2.4 years) were randomly submitted to both protocols. Blood collections were made pre, 3 minutes after, and 36 hours after each experimental session. No significant difference between MULTI vs. SINGLE was observed for the rises in blood lactate (p = 0.057) and GH (p = 0.285) levels. For CK, a significant difference between the protocols was noted, in which MULTI resulted in significant rises after 3 minutes (p = 0.017) and 36 hours (p = 0.043) compared with SINGLE. In conclusion, the findings of this study suggest that resistance-trained individuals display similar metabolic and hormonal responses when performing MULTI and SINGLE exercise protocols. Also, RE sessions comprising MULTI exercises induce a higher magnitude of muscle damage, which may require a longer recovery period compared with SINGLE.

Minimalist Training: Is Lower Dosage or Intensity Resistance Training Effective to Improve Physical Fitness? A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Findings from original research, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses have demonstrated the effectiveness of resistance training (RT) on markers of performance and health. However, the literature is inconsistent with regards to the dosage effects (frequency, intensity, time, type) of RT to maximize training-induced improvements. This is most likely due to moderating factors such as age, sex, and training status. Moreover, individuals with limited time to exercise or who lack motivation to perform RT are interested in the least amount of RT to improve physical fitness.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to investigate and identify lower than typically recommended RT dosages (i.e., shorter durations, lower volumes, and intensity activities) that can improve fitness components such as muscle strength and endurance for sedentary individuals or beginners not meeting the minimal recommendation of exercise.

METHODS

Due to the broad research question involving different RT types, cohorts, and outcome measures (i.e., high heterogeneity), a narrative review was selected instead of a systematic meta-analysis approach.

RESULTS

It seems that one weekly RT session is sufficient to induce strength gains in RT beginners with < 3 sets and loads below 50% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). With regards to the number of repetitions, the literature is controversial and some authors report that repetition to failure is key to achieve optimal adaptations, while other authors report similar adaptations with fewer repetitions. Additionally, higher intensity or heavier loads tend to provide superior results. With regards to the RT type, multi-joint exercises induce similar or even larger effects than single-joint exercises.

CONCLUSION

The least amount of RT that can be performed to improve physical fitness for beginners for at least the first 12 weeks is one weekly session at intensities below 50% 1RM, with < 3 sets per multi-joint exercise.

Maximal Number of Repetitions at Percentages of the One Repetition Maximum: A Meta-Regression and Moderator Analysis of Sex, Age, Training Status, and Exercise

The maximal number of repetitions that can be completed at various percentages of the one repetition maximum (1RM) [REPS ~ %1RM relationship] is foundational knowledge in resistance exercise programming. The current REPS ~ %1RM relationship is based on few studies and has not incorporated uncertainty into estimations or accounted for between-individuals variation. Therefore, we conducted a meta-regression to estimate the mean and between-individuals standard deviation of the number of repetitions that can be completed at various percentages of 1RM. We also explored if the REPS ~ %1RM relationship is moderated by sex, age, training status, and/or exercise. A total of 952 repetitions-to-failure tests, completed by 7289 individuals in 452 groups from 269 studies, were identified. Study groups were predominantly male (66%), healthy (97%), < 59 years of age (92%), and resistance trained (60%). The bench press (42%) and leg press (14%) were the most commonly studied exercises. The REPS ~ %1RM relationship for mean repetitions and standard deviation of repetitions were best described using natural cubic splines and a linear model, respectively, with mean and standard deviation for repetitions decreasing with increasing %1RM. More repetitions were evident in the leg press than bench press across the loading spectrum, thus separate REPS ~ %1RM tables were developed for these two exercises. Analysis of moderators suggested little influences of sex, age, or training status on the REPS ~ %1RM relationship, thus the general main model REPS ~ %1RM table can be applied to all individuals and to all exercises other than the bench press and leg press. More data are needed to develop REPS ~ %1RM tables for other exercises.

Effect of different training frequencies on maximal strength performance and muscle hypertrophy in trained individuals-a within-subject design

Several studies comparing resistance training (RT) frequencies may have been affected by the large between-subject variability. This study aimed to compare the changes in lower limbs maximal dynamic strength (1RM) and quadriceps femoris cross-sectional area (CSA) after a RT with different weekly frequencies in strength-trained individuals using a within-subject design. Twenty-four men participated in a 9-week RT program, being randomly divided into two conditions: resistance training with equalized total training volume (RTEV) and with unequalized total training volume (RTUV). The RT protocol used the unilateral leg press 45° exercise and each subject’s lower limb executed one of the proposed frequencies (one and three times/week). All conditions effectively increased 1RM and CSA (p<0.001); however, no significant differences were observed in the values of 1RM (p = 0.454) and CSA (p = 0.310) between the RT frequencies in the RTEV and RTUV conditions. Therefore, RT performed three times a week showed similar increases in 1RM and CSA to the program performed once a week, regardless of training volume equalization. Nevertheless, when the higher RT frequency allowed the application of a greater TTV (i.e., RTUV), higher effect size (ES) values (0.51 and 0.63, 1RM and CSA, respectively) were observed for the adaptations.

Multi-scale mechanobiological model for skeletal muscle hypertrophy

Skeletal muscle adaptation is correlated to training exercise by triggering different signaling pathways that target many functions; in particular, the IGF1-AKT pathway controls protein synthesis and degradation. These two functions regulate the adaptation in size and strength of muscles. Computational models for muscle adaptation have focused on: the biochemical description of signaling pathways or the mechanical description of muscle function at organ scale; however, an interrelation between these two models should be considered to understand how an adaptation in muscle size affects the protein synthesis rate. In this research, a dynamical model for the IGF1-AKT signaling pathway is linked to a continuum-mechanical model describing the active and passive mechanical response of a muscle; this model is used to study the impact of the adaptive muscle geometry on the protein synthesis at the fiber scale. This new computational model links the signaling pathway to the mechanical response by introducing a growth tensor, and links the mechanical response to the signaling pathway through the evolution of the protein synthesis rate. The predicted increase in cross sectional area (CSA) due to an 8 weeks training protocol excellently agreed with experimental data. Further, our results show that muscle growth rate decreases, if the correlation between protein synthesis and CSA is negative. The outcome of this study suggests that multi-scale models coupling continuum mechanical properties and molecular functions may improve muscular therapies and training protocols.

Effects and optimal dosage of resistance training on strength, functional capacity, balance, general health perception, and fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To analyze the effectiveness of resistance training programs (RTP) on strength, functional capacity, balance, general health perception, and fatigue for people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and to determine the most effective dose of RTP in this population.

METHODS

Studies examining the effect of RTP on strength, functional capacity, balance, general health perception, and fatigue in MS patients were included. 44 studies were included. The meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and meta-regression methods were used to calculate the mean difference and standardized mean difference.

RESULTS

Significant group differences were observed in knee extensor (p = 0.01) and flexor (p < 0.001), but not in 1-repetition maximum. Regarding functional capacity and balance, differences between groups, in favour of the RTP group, were found in the Timed Up and Go Test (p = 0.001), walking endurance, (p = 0.02) gait speed (p = 0.02) and balance (p = 0.02). No significant differences between groups were observed in fatigue or general health perception. The results regarding the optimal dose are inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

RTP improves strength, functional capacity, balance, and fatigue in people with MS. Registration: (PROSPERO): CRD42020182781Implications for rehabilitationResistance training is a valid strategy to improve isometric strength and functional capacity in MS patients.RTP using long durations (more than 6 weeks), high intensity (more than 80% 1-RM) and two-day weekly training frequency may be a correct stimulus to improve strength, functional capacity, balance, and fatigue in people with MS.Trainers and rehabilitators should consider these indicators in order to maximize muscular and functional adaptations in this population.

Equal-Volume Strength Training With Different Training Frequencies Induces Similar Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Improvement in Trained Participants

The main goal of the current study was to compare the effects of volume-equated training frequency on gains in muscle mass and strength. In addition, we aimed to investigate whether the effect of training frequency was affected by the complexity, concerning the degrees of freedom, of an exercise. Participants were randomized to a moderate training frequency group (two weekly sessions) or high training frequency group (four weekly sessions). Twenty-one participants (male: 11, female: 10, age: 25.9 ± 4.0) completed the 9-week whole-body progressive heavy resistance training intervention with moderate (n = 13) or high (n = 8) training frequency. Whole-body and regional changes in lean mass were measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, while the vastus lateralis thickness was measured by ultrasound. Changes in muscle strength were measured as one repetition maximum for squat, hack squat, bench press, and chest press. No differences between groups were observed for any of the measures of muscle growth or muscle strength. Muscle strength increased to a greater extent in hack squat and chest press than squat and bench press for both moderate (50 and 21% vs. 19 and 14%, respectively) and high-frequency groups (63 and 31% vs. 19 and 16%, respectively), with no differences between groups. These results suggest that training frequency is less decisive when weekly training volume is equated. Further, familiarity with an exercise seems to be of greater importance for strength adaptations than the complexity of the exercise.

High Resistance-Training Volume Enhances Muscle Thickness in Resistance-Trained Men

ABSTRACT

Brigatto, FA, Lima, LEdM, Germano, MD, Aoki, MS, Braz, TV, and Lopes, CR. High resistance-training volume enhances muscle thickness in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 36(1): 22-30, 2022-This study investigated the effects of different volumes of resistance training (RT) (8 weeks of 16, 24, and 32 weekly sets per muscle group) on muscular strength and hypertrophy. Subjects were pair-matched according to baseline strength and then randomly assigned to 1 of 3 experimental groups: 16 weekly sets per muscle group (G16, n = 9), 24 weekly sets per muscle group (G24, n = 9), or 32 weekly sets per muscle group (G32, n = 9). All other RT variables (e.g., exercise performed, exercise order, weekly frequency, range of repetitions, rest interval between sets and exercises, etc.) were maintained constant. The total load lifted was calculated for every RT session to compare the accumulated external training load among experimental groups across the intervention period. Testing was conducted before intervention (pre) and after 8-week (post-8) periods for maximal voluntary muscle strength (1 repetition maximum [1RM] test for bench press and parallel back squat exercises) and muscle thickness (MT) of the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, and vastus lateralis. The major findings were as follows: (a) all RT volumes increased bench press and parallel back squat 1RM and (b) all RT volumes increased the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, and vastus lateralis MT. The magnitude of increase in 1RM and MT of the lower body when training with 32 weekly sets per muscle group was higher than for 16 weekly sets per muscle group. The magnitude of the increase in MTTB was higher when training with 32 weekly sets than for 16 weekly sets.

Split or full-body workout routine: which is best to increase muscle strength and hypertrophy?

Objective:

To compare the effects of different resistance training programs on measures of muscle strength and hypertrophy.

Methods:

Sixty-seven untrained subjects were randomized to one of two groups: Split Workout Routine (n=35), in which muscle groups were trained twice per week in an A/B split consisting of eight sets per session, or Full-Body Workout Routine (n=32), in which muscle groups were trained four times per week with four and eight sets per session. Both groups performed eight to 12 repetition maximum per set, with 60 seconds of rest between sets. Maximal strength and muscle thickness were assessed at baseline and after eight weeks of training.

Results:

A significant main effect of time (pre versus post) was observed for maximal strength in the bench press and squat exercises and thickness of the elbow extensor, elbow flexor and quadriceps femoris muscles. Selected variables did not differ significantly between groups.

Conclusion:

Resistance training twice or four times per week has similar effects on neuromuscular adaptation, provided weekly set volume is equal.

Influence of Isometric Exercise Combined With Electromyostimulation on Inflammatory Cytokine Levels, Muscle Strength, and Knee Joint Function in Elderly Women With Early Knee Osteoarthritis

Background and Objectives: Muscle strengthening exercise is suggested to beneficial for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and electrical muscular stimulation is reported to be effective in improvement of muscle strength. This study examined whether isometric exercise combined with whole body-electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) can improve serum cytokine levels, muscle strength, and knee function in elderly women with early knee OA.

Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled study included 75 participants assigned into three groups: the control group (CON), isometric exercise group (ISOM), and isometric exercise and electromyostimulation group (ISOM + EMS). The two exercise groups performed their respective programs for 8 weeks, 3 days a week, 30 min a day. The main exercises for both groups were performed continuously during the 20 min in an alternation of a 6-s contraction with a 4-s break. At pre- and post-intervention, anthropometric variables, muscle strength, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and blood sampling for biomarkers including interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and resistin were performed.

Results: All variables at pre-intervention showed no significant differences among the three groups. However, there were significant differences between groups for body composition, muscle strength, KOOS subscale scores, and biomarkers. ISOM + EMS group resulted in a significant reduction in body weight, fat mass, fat percentage, inflammatory cytokine levels, and increased muscle strength. An ISOM + EMS group had the best KOOS score among all groups.

Conclusion: Isometric exercise combined with WB-EMS resulted in the best overall improvements in knee function and alleviating the pain and symptoms of patients with early knee OA. Further, reduced levels of inflammatory cytokines were observed. These non-pharmacologic, non-invasive interventions should be considered by healthcare specialists for elderly patients with early knee OA.

Effect Sizes for Paired Data Should Use the Change Score Variability Rather Than the Pre-test Variability

ABSTRACT

Dankel, SJ and Loenneke, JP. Effect sizes for paired data should use the change score variability rather than the pre-test variability. J Strength Cond Res 35(6): 1773-1778, 2021-Effect sizes provide a universal statistic detailing the magnitude of an effect while removing the influence of the sample size. Effect sizes and statistical tests are closely related with the exception that the effect size illustrates the magnitude of an effect in SD units, whereas the test statistic illustrates the magnitude of effect in SE units. Avoiding statistical jargon, we illustrate why calculations of effect sizes on paired data within the sports and exercise science literature are repeatedly performed incorrectly using the variability of the study sample as opposed to the variability of the actual intervention. Statistics and examples are provided to illustrate why effect sizes are being calculated incorrectly. The calculation of effect sizes when examining paired data supports the results of the test statistic, but only when the effect size calculation is made relative to the variability of the intervention (i.e., the change score SD) because this is what is used for the calculation of the test statistic. Effect size calculations that are made on paired data should be made relative to the SD of the change score because this provides the information of the statistical test while removing the influence of the sample size. After all, we are interested in how variable the intervention is rather than how variable the sample population is. Effect size calculations that are made on pre-test/post-test designs should be calculated as the change score divided by the SD of the change score.

Effects of Variations in Resistance Training Frequency on Strength Development in Well-Trained Populations and Implications for In-Season Athlete Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In-season competition and tournaments for team sports can be both long and congested, with some sports competing up to three times per week. During these periods of time, athletes need to prepare technically, tactically and physically for the next fixture and the short duration between fixtures means that, in some cases, physical preparation ceases, or training focus moves to recovery as opposed to progressing adaptations.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to investigate the effect of training frequency on muscular strength to determine if a potential method to accommodate in-season resistance training, during busy training schedules, could be achieved by utilizing shorter more frequent training sessions across a training week.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the SPORTDiscus, Ovid, PubMed and Scopus databases. 2134 studies were identified prior to application of the following inclusion criteria: (1) maximal strength was assessed, (2) a minimum of two different training frequency groups were included, (3) participants were well trained, and finally (4) compound exercises were included within the training programmes. A Cochrane risk of bias assessment was applied to studies that performed randomized controlled trials and consistency of studies was analysed using I² as a test of heterogeneity. Secondary analysis of studies included Hedges' g effect sizes (g) and between-study differences were estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Inconsistency of effects between pre- and post-intervention was low within-group (I² = 0%), and moderate between-group (I² ≤ 73.95%). Risk of bias was also low based upon the Cochrane risk of bias assessment. Significant increases were observed overall for both upper (p ≤ 0.022) and lower (p ≤ 0.008) body strength, pre- to post-intervention, when all frequencies were assessed. A small effect was observed between training frequencies for upper (g ≤ 0.58) and lower body (g ≤ 0.45).

CONCLUSION

Over a 6-12-week period, there are no clear differences in maximal strength development between training frequencies, in well-trained populations. Such observations may permit the potential for training to be manipulated around competition schedules and volume to be distributed across shorter, but more frequent training sessions within a micro-cycle rather than being condensed into 1-2 sessions per week, in effect, allowing for a micro-dosing of the strength stimuli.

Effects of different resistance training frequencies on body composition and muscular performance adaptations in men

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 8 weeks resistance training (RT) with two sessions versus four sessions per week under volume load-equated conditions on body composition, maximal strength, and explosive actions performance in recreationally trained men.

METHODS

Thirty-five healthy young men participated in the study and were randomly divided into a two sessions per-week RT (RT2, n = 12), four sessions per-week RT (RT4, n = 13) or a control group (CG, n = 10). All subjects were evaluated for thigh, chest and arm circumference, countermovement jump (CMJ), medicine ball throw (MBT), 1-repetition maximum (1RM) leg press, bench press, arm curl, muscular endurance (i.e., 60% of 1RM to failure) for leg press, and bench press at pre, mid (week 4) and post an 8-week training intervention.

RESULTS

A two-way analysis of variance with repeated measures (3 [group] × 3 [time]) revealed that both training groups increased chest and thigh circumferences, strength and explosive actions performance tests in comparison to CG following 8 weeks of training (p = 0.01 to 0.04). Group × time interactions were also noted in 1RM bench press (effects size [ES] = 1.07 vs. 0.89) and arm curl (ES = 1.15 vs. 0.89), with greater gains for RT4 than RT2 (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

RT improved muscle strength, explosive actions performance and markers of muscle size in recreationally trained men; however, four sessions of resistance training per week produced greater gains in muscular strength for the upper body measures (i.e., 1RM bench press and arm curl) when compared to two sessions per week under volume-equated conditions.

The Minimum Effective Training Dose Required to Increase 1RM Strength in Resistance-Trained Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Increases in muscular strength may increase sports performance, reduce injury risk, are associated with a plethora of health markers, as well as exerting positive psychological effects. Due to their efficiency and effectiveness in increasing total body muscular strength, multi-joint exercises like the powerlifts, i.e.: the squat (SQ), bench-press (BP) and deadlift (DL), are widely used by active individuals as well as athletes in the pursuit of increasing strength. To date, the concept of a minimum dose, i.e. "what is the minimum one needs to do to increase 1-repetition maximum (1RM) strength?" has not been directly examined in the literature, especially in the context of the powerlifts. This review aims to explore the current available evidence around the minimum effective training dose required to increase 1RM strength in trained individuals in an attempt to enhance the practical guidelines around resistance-training as well as provide active individuals, athletes and coaches with more flexibility when designing a training protocol.

METHODS

One reviewer independently conducted the search in a PRISMA systematic approach using PubMed, SportDiscus and Google Scholar databases. The databases were searched with the following search terms/phrases and Boolean operators: "training volume" AND "powerlifting" OR "1RM strength" OR "powerlifters", "low volume" AND "powerlifting" OR "powerlifting" OR "1RM strength", "high vs low volume" AND "powerlifting" OR "1RM strength", "minimum effective training dose 1RM". Meta-analyses were performed to estimate the change in 1RM strength for the lowest dose group in the included studies.

RESULTS

From the initial 2629 studies, 6 studies met our inclusion criteria. All identified studies showed that a single set performed minimum 1 time and maximum 3 times per week was sufficient to induce significant 1RM strength gains. Meta-analysis of 5 studies showed an estimated increase for overall 1RM of 12.09 kg [95% CIs 8.16 kg-16.03 kg], an increase of 17.48 kg [95% CIs 8.51 kg-26.46 kg] for the SQ, and 8.25 kg [95% CIs 0.68 kg-15.83 kg] for the BP. All of the included studies contained details on most of the variables comprising "training dose", such as: weekly and per session sets and repetitions as well as intensity of effort. Specific information regarding load (%1RM) was not provided by all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present systematic review suggest that performing a single set of 6-12 repetitions with loads ranging from approximately 70-85% 1RM 2-3 times per week with high intensity of effort (reaching volitional or momentary failure) for 8-12 weeks can produce suboptimal, yet significant increases in SQ and BP 1RM strength in resistance-trained men. However, because of the lack of research, it is less clear as to whether these improvements may also be achievable in DL 1RM strength or in trained women and highly trained strength athletes.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018108911).

Effects of Whole Body Electrostimulation Associated With Body Weight Training on Functional Capacity and Body Composition in Inactive Older People

Objective: To analyze the effects of whole body electrostimulation (WB-EMS) with body weight training on functional fitness and body composition of older men.

Methods: Twenty physically inactive older men were randomized into: Control group (control), performed the body weight exercise training wearing electrostimulation clothing, but without receiving electrical current stimuli (n = 10), and body weight associated with whole body electrostimulation group (BW+WB-EMS), performed the body weight exercise training wearing electrostimulation clothing plus whole body electrostimulation (n = 10). The training sessions were performed twice a week for 6 weeks and included eight exercises using body weight, performed in two sets of eight repetitions. Physical function was assessed using a battery composed of seven tests, six derived from the Senior fitness test and a handgrip strength test. We also measured the muscle thickness (MT) of the biceps and triceps brachii and vastus lateralis.

Results: The BW+WB-EMS group presented increased (p < 0.05) performance in the 30-s chair stand test (10.2 ± 3.3 vs. 13.8 ± 5.0 reps), arm curl (16.6 ± 3.9 vs. 19.9 ± 6.1 reps), 6-min walk test (402 ± 96 vs. 500 ± 104 m), and handgrip strength test (30 ± 11 vs. 32 ± 11 kgf). The BW+WB-EMS group also presented increased MT (p < 0.05) in the biceps brachii (17.7 ± 3.0 vs. 21.4 ± 3.4 mm), triceps brachial (14.7 ± 3.6 vs. 17.5 ± 4.1 mm), and vastus lateralis muscles (15.1 ± 2.6 vs. 18.6 ± 4.3 mm). Moderate correlations were found in arm curl (p = 0.011, r = 0.552) but not handgrip strength (p = 0.053, r = 0.439) with changes in the biceps MT. Moderate changes in the 6-min walk distance were significantly correlated with changes in vastus lateralis MT (p = 0.036, r = 0.471). There was a moderate correlation between the changes in the 30-s chair stand test (p = 0.006, r = 0.589) and changes in the vastus lateralis MT. Furthermore, although a moderate correlation (r = 0.438) was found between triceps MT and handgrip strength no significant difference (p = 0.053) was reported. Additionally, there were no statistical differences in any parameters for the control group.

Conclusion: WB-EMS with body weight training increased functional fitness and MT in physically inactive older men.

Twice-daily sessions result in a greater muscle strength and a similar muscle hypertrophy compared to once-daily session in resistance-trained men

BACKGROUND

The present study investigated the mid-term effects of training muscle groups once- versus twice-daily on morphofunctional adaptations in trained men.

METHODS

Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental groups: 1 daily session per muscle group (1S, n = 11), where every muscle group was trained once a day or 2 daily sessions per muscle group (2S, n = 12), where every muscle group was trained twice. Testing was conducted before intervention and after 8 weeks for maximal strength (1RM) and muscular endurance (60%1RM) for bench press and parallel back squat exercises, and muscle thickness (MT) of the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, vastus lateralis, anterior quadriceps and pectoralis major.

RESULTS

The major findings were as follows: (a) the increase in 1RM back squat was significantly greater in 2S (Δ=16.1%) compared to 1S (Δ=7.8%) (p<0.05) and (b) both groups significantly increased bench press 1RM (1S: Δ=4.6%; 2S: Δ=6.8%), back squat 60% 1RM (1S: Δ= 19.0%; 2S: Δ= 24.3%), bench press 60% 1RM (1S: Δ= 15.4%; 2S: Δ= 24.0%) and all MT outcomes (p< 0.05 for all), with no differences between experimental groups (1S and 2S).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that a twice-daily resistance training augments lower-body muscular strength; however, the daily frequency does not seem to have any additive effect on upper-body muscular strength, muscular endurance, and muscle hypertrophy in trained men.

Effects of training frequency on muscular strength for trained men under volume matched conditions

Background

In resistance training, the role of training frequency to increase maximal strength is often debated. However, the limited data available does not allow for clear training frequency “optimization” recommendations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of training frequency on maximal muscular strength and rate of perceived exertion (RPE). The total weekly training volume was equally distributed between two and four sessions per muscle group.

Methods

Twenty-one experienced resistance-trained male subjects (height: 1.85 ± 0.06 m, body mass: 85.3 ± 12.3 kg, age: 27.6 ± 7.6 years) were tested prior to and after an 8-week training period in one-repetition maximum (1RM) barbell back squat and bench press. Subjects were randomly assigned to a SPLIT group (n = 10), in which there were two training sessions of squats and lower-body exercises and two training sessions of bench press and upper-body exercises, or a FULLBODY group (n = 11), in which four sessions with squats, bench press and supplementary exercises were conducted every session. In each session, the subjects rated their RPE after barbell back squat, bench press, and the full session.

Results

Both groups significantly increased 1RM strength in barbell back squat (SPLIT group: +13.25 kg; FULLBODY group: +14.31 kg) and bench press (SPLIT group: +7.75 kg; FULLBODY group: +8.86 kg) but training frequency did not affect this increase for squat (p = 0.640) or bench press (p = 0.431). Both groups showed a significant effect for time on RPE on all three measurements. The analyses showed only an interaction effect between groups on time for the RPE after the squat exercise (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

We conclude that there are no additional benefits of increasing the training frequency from two to four sessions under volume-equated conditions, but it could be favorable to spread the total training volume into several training bouts through the week to avoid potential increases in RPE, especially after the squat exercise.

The Effectiveness of Frequency-Based Resistance Training Protocols on Muscular Performance and Hypertrophy in Trained Males: A Critically Appraised Topic

Clinical Scenario: Manipulation of exercise variables in resistance training (RT) is an important component in the development of muscular strength, power, and hypertrophy. Currently, most research centers on untrained or recreationally trained subjects. This critically appraised topic focuses on studies that center on the well-trained subject with regard to frequency of training. Clinical Question: In well-trained male subjects, is there an association between RT frequency and the development of muscular strength and hypertrophy? Summary of Key Findings: Four studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. All studies showed that lower-frequency training could elicit muscular strength and hypertrophy increases. One study suggested that a higher frequency compared with a lower frequency may provide a slight benefit to hypertrophic development. One study reported a greater level of delayed onset muscle soreness with lower frequency training. The 4 studies demonstrate support for the clinical question. Clinical Bottom Line: Current evidence suggests that lower-frequency RT produces equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT when volume is equated. The evidence is particularly convincing when lower-frequency RT is associated with a total-body training protocol in well-trained male subjects. Strength of Recommendation: There is moderate-to-strong evidence to suggest that lower-frequency RT, when volume is equated, will produce equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT.

Effects of a resistance training program on muscular performance adaptations: comparing three vs. four times per week

Study aim: The aim of this study was to examine the effects of 8 weeks of resistance training (RT) with three vs. four sessions per week and equated training volume on muscular adaptations in men.

Materials and methods: Thirty-three healthy young men volunteered to participate in the study and were randomly assigned to three times per week whole-body RT (RT3, n = 11), four times per week whole-body RT (RT4, n = 11) or a control group (CG, n = 11). Before and after training, participants were evaluated for one-repetition maximum (1RM) and muscular endurance (i.e., 60% of 1RM to failure) for the leg press and bench press. In addition, thigh, arm, chest, and calf circumferences, and percent body fat were assessed before and after training.

Results: The findings revealed significant main effects of time for chest and thigh circumferences (p ≤ 0.05). There were no significant group × time interactions for chest and thigh circumferences (p > 0.05), but the RT4 showed greater changes (effect size [ES]: 0.48 vs. 0.15) in chest circumference, while the RT3 showed greater changes (ES: 0.77 vs. 0.35) in thigh circumference. Significant group × time interactions were observed for the 1RM of leg and bench presses (p < 0.05). Post-hoc analyses showed greater improvements for RT3 in comparison to RT4 in 1RM bench press (p = 0.01, ES: 0.77 vs. 0.6) and leg presses (p = 0.009, ES: 0.94 vs. 0.86).

Conclusions: These results suggest that RT induces meaningful adaptive effects to improve strength and muscle size in men and RT3 appears to be more effective to induce muscular adaptations.

Similar Muscular Adaptations in Resistance Training Performed Two Versus Three Days Per Week

The purpose of the present study was to compare changes in muscle strength and hypertrophy between volume-equated resistance training (RT) performed 2 versus 3 times per week in trained men. Thirty-six resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental groups: a split-body training routine (SPLIT) with muscle groups trained twice per week (n = 18) over four weekly sessions, or a total-body routine (TOTAL), with muscle groups being trained three times per week (n = 18) over three weekly sessions. The training intervention lasted 10 weeks. Testing was carried out pre- and post-study to assess maximal muscular strength in the back squat and bench press, and hypertrophic adaptations were assessed by measuring muscle thickness of the elbow flexors, elbow extensors, and quadriceps femoris. Twenty-eight subjects completed the study. Significant pre-to-post intervention increases in upper and lower-body muscular strength occurred in both groups with no significant between-group differences. Furthermore, significant pre-to-post intervention increases in muscle size of the elbow extensors and quadriceps femoris occurred in both groups with no significant between-group differences. No significant pre-to-post changes were observed for the muscle size of elbow flexors both in the SPLIT or TOTAL group. In conclusion, a training frequency of 2 versus 3 days per week produces similar increases in muscular adaptations in trained men over a 10-week training period. Nonetheless, effect size differences favored SPLIT for all hypertrophy measures, indicating a potential benefit for training two versus three days a week when the goal is to maximize gains in muscle mass.

How many times per week should a muscle be trained to maximize muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of resistance training frequency

Training frequency is considered an important variable in the hypertrophic response to regimented resistance exercise. The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies designed to investigate the effects of weekly training frequency on hypertrophic adaptations. Following a systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scoups, and SPORTDiscus databases, a total of 25 studies were deemed to meet inclusion criteria. Results showed no significant difference between higher and lower frequency on a volume-equated basis. Moreover, no significant differences were seen between frequencies of training across all categories when taking into account direct measures of growth, in those considered resistance-trained, and when segmenting into training for the upper body and lower body. Meta-regression analysis of non-volume-equated studies showed a significant effect favoring higher frequencies, although the overall difference in magnitude of effect between frequencies of 1 and 3+ days per week was modest. In conclusion, there is strong evidence that resistance training frequency does not significantly or meaningfully impact muscle hypertrophy when volume is equated. Thus, for a given training volume, individuals can choose a weekly frequency per muscle groups based on personal preference.

Resistance training frequency and skeletal muscle hypertrophy: A review of available evidence

OBJECTIVES

Current reviews and position stands on resistance training (RT) frequency and associated muscular hypertrophy are based on limited evidence holding implications for practical application and program design. Considering that several recent studies have shed new light on this topic, the present paper aimed to collate the available evidence on RT frequency and the associated effect on muscular hypertrophy.

DESIGN

Review article.

METHODS

Articles for this review were obtained through searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus. Both volume-equated (studies in which RT frequency is the only manipulated variable) and non-volume-equated (studies in which both RT frequency and volume are the manipulated variables) study designs were considered.

RESULTS

Ten studies were found that used direct site-specific measures of hypertrophy, and, in general, reported that RT once per week elicits similar hypertrophy compared to training two or three times per week. In addition, 21 studies compared different RT frequencies and used lean body mass devices to estimate muscular growth; most of which reported no significant differences between training frequencies. Five studies were identified that used circumference for estimating muscular growth. These studies provided findings that are difficult to interpret, considering that circumference is a crude measure of hypertrophy (i.e., it does not allow for the differentiation between adipose tissue, intracellular fluids, and muscle mass).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this review, it appears that under volume-equated conditions, RT frequency does not seem to have a pronounced effect of gains in muscle mass.

Weekly Training Frequency Effects on Strength Gain: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The current recommendations for resistance training (RT) frequency range from 2 to 5 days per week (days week^− 1) depending on the subjects’ training status. However, the relationship between RT frequency and muscular strength remains controversial with reported variances existing across different population groups. We conducted a meta-analysis that (1) quantified the effects of low (LF; 1 day week^− 1), medium (MF; 2 days week^− 1), or high (HF; ≥ 3 days week^− 1) RT frequency on muscular strength per exercise; (2) examined the effects of different RT frequency on one repetition maximum (1RM) strength gain profiles (multi-joint exercises and single joint exercises); (3) examined the effects of different RT frequency on 1RM strength gain when RT volume is equated; and (4) examined the effects of different RT frequency on 1RM strength gains on upper and lower body.

Methods

Computerised searches were performed using the terms ‘strength training frequency’, ‘resistance training frequency’, ‘training frequency’, and ‘weekly training frequency’. After review, 12 studies were deemed suitable according to pre-set eligibility criteria. Primary data were pooled using a random-effects model. Outcomes analysed for main effects were pre- to post strength change with volume-equated studies that combined multi-joint and isolation exercise; isolation-only exercise and untrained subjects only. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using I² and Cochran’s Q statistics with funnel plots used to assess publication bias and sensitivity analyses calculated for subgroups.

Results

Pre- versus post-training strength analysis comprised of 74 treatment groups from 12 studies. For combined multi-joint and isolation exercises, there was a trend towards higher RT frequency compared with lower frequency [mean effect size (ES) 0.09 (95% CI − 0.06–0.24)] however not significant (p = 0.25). Volume-equated pre- to post-intervention strength gain was similar when LF was compared to HF [mean ES 0.03 (95% CI − 0.20–0.27); p = 0.78]. Upper body pre- to post-intervention strength gain was greater when HF was compared with LF [mean ES 0.48 (95% CI 0.20–0.76)] with significant differences between frequencies (p < 0.01). Upper body pre- to post-intervention strength gain was similar when MF was compared with LF (ES 0.12; 95% CI − 0.22–0.47); p = 0.48]. There was no significant difference in lower body mean ES between HF and LF [mean ES 0.21(95% CI − 0.55–0.13); p = 0.22]. There was a trend towards a difference in mean ES between MF and HF [mean ES 0.41(95% CI − 0.26–1.09); however, the effect was not significant (p = 0.23).

Conclusions

The existing data does not provide a strong correlation between increased weekly training frequency (HF) and maximal strength gain in upper and lower body resistance exercises for a mixed population group. When RT is volume-equated for combined multi-joint and isolation exercises, there is no significant effect of RT frequency on muscular strength gain. More investigations are required to explore the effects of varying weekly training frequencies adequately.

Higher Training Frequency Is Important for Gaining Muscular Strength Under Volume-Matched Training

Background: This study investigated the effect of volume-matched strength training programs with different frequency and subsequent detraining on muscle size and strength.

Methods: During a training period of 11 weeks, untrained subjects (age: 22.3 ± 0.9 years, height: 173.1 ± 4.8 cm and body mass: 66.8 ± 8.4 kg) performed knee-extension exercise at 67% of their estimated one-repetition maximum either one session per week (T1 group: 6 sets of 12 repetitions per session; n = 10) or three sessions per week (T3 group: 2 sets of 12 repetitions per session; n = 10). Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and muscle stiffness were measured as an index of muscle fatigue and muscle damage, respectively. The magnitude of muscle hypertrophy was assessed with thigh circumference and the quadriceps muscle thickness. The changes in muscle strength were measured with isometric maximum voluntary contraction torque (MVC).

Results: During the training period, RPE was significantly higher in the T1 than in the T3 (p < 0.001). After 11 weeks of training, both groups exhibited significant improvements in thigh circumference, muscle thickness, and MVC compared with baseline values. However, there was a significant group difference in MVC improvement at week 11 (T1: 43.5 ± 15.5%, T3: 65.2 ± 23.2%, p < 0.05). After 6 weeks of detraining, both groups showed the significant decreases in thigh circumference and muscle thickness from those at the end of training period, while no significant effect of detraining was observed in MVC.

Conclusion: These results suggest that three training sessions per week with two sets are recommended for untrained subjects to improve muscle strength while minimizing fatigue compared to one session per week with six sets.