A comparison of volume-equated knee extensions to failure, or not to failure, upon rating of perceived exertion and strength adaptations
A comparison of volume-equated knee extensions to failure, or not to failure, upon rating of perceived exertion and strength adaptations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1139/apnm-2015-0421
复制
发表时间：
2016-02-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Steele, James
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fisher, James Peter;Blossom, Dominic;Steele, James
本研究旨在比较重复时间、容量和负荷匹配的阻力训练对肌肉衰竭(MMF)和非肌肉衰竭(NMF)的最大伸膝等长力量的影响。这一设计还允许测试“5x5”培训的效果。9名游憩活动型男性(年龄21.4+/-1.2岁；身高1.79±0.07m；体重78.4+/-7.1 kg)进行单侧阻力训练，最大扭矩80%，每周2x，共6周。参与者使用他们的非优势腿进行5组5次重复(NMF)。参与者使用他们的优势腿，在尽可能少的组中进行25次重复(MMF)。所有重复都是以S同心2次，S等长停顿1次，S偏心2次，每组休息2分钟。分析发现，干预前后MMF和NMF的强度都有显著增加，效应大小(Ess)分别为2.01和1.65，两种情况之间没有显著差异(p>；0.05)。与非美容条件相比，美容美容的体力消耗(RPEs)峰值和平均评分显著更高(p<；0.0001)，并且在非美容条件下，较晚设置的患者的RPE值有显著升高的趋势。与MMF相比，NMF每节课的总训练时间明显更长(p<；0.001)。本研究表明，在未经训练的参与者中，当容量匹配时，阻力训练NMF产生的力量增加与训练中的MMF相同。然而，对MMF的阻力训练似乎是一种更省时的方案，并可能产生更大的力量收益，如较大的ES所示。
The present study aimed to compare the effects of repetition duration-, volume-, and load-matched resistance training to muscular failure (MMF) or not to muscular failure (NMF) on maximal voluntary isometric knee extensor strength. This design also allowed testing of the efficacy of "5x5" training. Nine recreationally active males (age, 21.4 +/- 1.2 years; height, 1.79 +/- 0.07 m; weight, 78.4 +/- 7.1 kg) performed unilateral resistance training at 80% of maximal torque at 2x/week for 6 weeks. Using their nondominant leg, participants performed 5 sets of 5 repetitions (NMF). Using their dominant leg, participants performed 25 repetitions in as few sets as possible (MMF). All repetitions were performed at a pace of 2 s concentric, 1 s isometric pause, and 2 s eccentric with a 2-min rest interval between sets. Analyses identified significant pre-to post-intervention strength increases for both MMF and NMF, with effect sizes (ESs) of 2.01 and 1.65, respectively, with no significant differences between conditions (p > 0.05). Peak and mean ratings of perceived exertion (RPEs) were significantly higher for MMF compared with NMF conditions (p < 0.0001), and a tendency for significantly higher RPE values reported for later sets for the NMF condition. Total training time per session was significantly longer for NMF compared with MMF (p < 0.001). The present study suggests that in untrained participants, resistance training NMF produces equivocally the same strength increases as training to MMF when volumematched. However, resistance training to MMF appears to be a more time-efficient protocol and may produce greater strength gains as indicated by a larger ES.