Dataset Information

Best Time of Day for Strength and Endurance Training to Improve Health and Performance? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Current recommendations for physical exercise include information about the frequency, intensity, type, and duration of exercise. However, to date, there are no recommendations on what time of day one should exercise. The aim was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate if the time of day of exercise training in intervention studies influences the degree of improvements in physical performance or health-related outcomes.

Methods

The databases EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to January 2023. Eligibility criteria were that the studies conducted structured endurance and/or strength training with a minimum of two exercise sessions per week for at least 2 weeks and compared exercise training between at least two different times of the day using a randomized crossover or parallel group design.

Results

From 14,125 screened articles, 26 articles were included in the systematic review of which seven were also included in the meta-analyses. Both the qualitative synthesis and the quantitative synthesis (i.e., meta-analysis) provide little evidence for or against the hypothesis that training at a specific time of day leads to more improvements in performance-related or health-related outcomes compared to other times. There was some evidence that there is a benefit when training and testing occur at the same time of day, mainly for performance-related outcomes. Overall, the risk of bias in most studies was high.

Conclusions

The current state of research provides evidence neither for nor against a specific time of the day being more beneficial, but provides evidence for larger effects when there is congruency between training and testing times. This review provides recommendations to improve the design and execution of future studies on this topic.

Registration

PROSPERO (CRD42021246468).

SUBMITTER: Bruggisser F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10198889 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Best Time of Day for Strength and Endurance Training to Improve Health and Performance? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Bruggisser Fabienne F Knaier Raphael R Roth Ralf R Wang Wei W Qian Jingyi J Scheer Frank A J L FAJL

Sports medicine - open 20230519 1

<h4>Background</h4>Current recommendations for physical exercise include information about the frequency, intensity, type, and duration of exercise. However, to date, there are no recommendations on what time of day one should exercise. The aim was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate if the time of day of exercise training in intervention studies influences the degree of improvements in physical performance or health-related outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>The databases EMB ...[more]

PMID: 37208462

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany sports require maximal strength and endurance performance. Concurrent strength and endurance training can lead to suboptimal training adaptations. However, how adaptations differ between males and females is currently unknown. Additionally, current training status may affect training adaptations.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess sex-specific differences in adaptations in strength, power, muscle hypertrophy, and maximal oxygen consumption ( V˙ O2max) to concurrent strength and endurance training in healthy adults. Second, we investigated how training adaptations are influenced by strength and endurance training status.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and a Cochrane risk of bias was evaluated. ISI Web of science, PubMed/MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched using the following inclusion criteria: healthy adults aged 18-50 years, intervention period of ≥ 4 weeks, and outcome measures were defined as upper- and lower-body strength, power, hypertrophy, and/or V˙ O2max. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and reported in standardized mean differences.ResultsIn total, 59 studies with 1346 participants were included. Concurrent training showed blunted lower-body strength adaptations in males, but not in females (male: - 0.43, 95% confidence interval [- 0.64 to - 0.22], female: 0.08 [- 0.34 to 0.49], group difference: P = 0.03). No sex differences were observed for changes in upper-body strength (P = 0.67), power (P = 0.37), or V˙ O2max (P = 0.13). Data on muscle hypertrophy were insufficient to draw any conclusions. For training status, untrained but not trained or highly trained endurance athletes displayed lower V˙ O2max gains with concurrent training (P = 0.04). For other outcomes, no differences were found between untrained and trained individuals, both for strength and endurance training status.ConclusionsConcurrent training results in small interference for lower-body strength adaptations in males, but not in females. Untrained, but not trained or highly trained endurance athletes demonstrated impaired improvements in V˙ O2max following concurrent training. More studies on females and highly strength-trained and endurance-trained athletes are warranted.Clinical trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42022370894.

Project description:BackgroundPolarized training intensity distribution (POL) was recently suggested to be superior to other training intensity distribution (TID) regimens for endurance performance improvement.ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze evidence comparing POL to other TIDs on endurance performance.MethodsPRISMA guidelines were followed. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022365117). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to 20 October 2022 for studies in adults and young adults for ≥ 4 weeks comparing POL with other TID interventions regarding VO2peak, time-trial (TT), time to exhaustion (TTE) or speed or power at the second ventilatory or lactate threshold (V/P at VT2/LT2). Risk of bias was assessed with RoB-2 and ROBINS-I. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE. Results were analyzed by random effects meta-analysis using standardized mean differences.ResultsSeventeen studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 437 subjects). Pooled effect estimates suggest POL superiority for improving VO2peak (SMD = 0.24 [95% CI 0.01, 0.48]; z = 2.02 (p = 0.040); 11 studies, n = 284; I2 = 0%; high certainty of evidence). Superiority, however, only occurred in shorter interventions (< 12 weeks) (SMD = 0.40 [95% CI 0.08, 0.71; z = 2.49 (p = 0.01); n = 163; I2 = 0%) and for highly trained athletes (SMD = 0.46 [95% CI 0.10, 0.82]; z = 2.51 (p = 0.01); n = 125; I2 = 0%). The remaining endurance performance surrogates were similarly affected by POL and other TIDs: TT (SMD = - 0.01 [95% CI -0.28, 0.25]; z = - 0.10 (p = 0.92); n = 221; I2 = 0%), TTE (SMD = 0.30 [95% CI - 0.20, 0.79]; z = 1.18 (p = 0.24); n = 66; I2 = 0%) and V/P VT2/LT2 (SMD = 0.04 [95% CI -0.21, 0.29]; z = 0.32 (p = 0.75); n = 253; I2 = 0%). Risk of bias for randomized controlled trials was rated as of some concern and for non-randomized controlled trials as low risk of bias (two studies) and some concerns (one study).ConclusionsPOL is superior to other TIDs for improving VO2peak, particularly in shorter duration interventions and highly trained athletes. However, the effect of POL was similar to that of other TIDs on the remaining surrogates of endurance performance. The results suggest that POL more effectively improves aerobic power but is similar to other TIDs for improving aerobic capacity.

Project description:BackgroundBoth strength and endurance training are included in global exercise recommendations and are the main components of training programs for competitive sports. While an abundance of research has been published regarding concurrent strength and endurance training, only a small portion of this research has been conducted in females or has addressed their unique physiological circumstances (e.g., hormonal profiles related to menstrual cycle phase, menstrual dysfunction, and hormonal contraceptive use), which may influence training responses and adaptations.ObjectiveThe aim was to complete a systematic review of the scientific literature regarding training adaptations following concurrent strength and endurance training in apparently healthy adult females.MethodsA systematic electronic search for articles was performed in July 2021 and again in December 2022 using PubMed and Medline. This review followed, where applicable, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of the included studies was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist. Inclusion criteria were (1) fully published peer-reviewed publications; (2) study published in English; (3) participants were healthy normal weight or overweight females of reproductive age (mean age between > 18 and < 50) or presented as a group (n > 5) in studies including both females and males and where female results were reported separately; (4) participants were randomly assigned to intervention groups, when warranted, and the study included measures of maximal strength and endurance performance; and (5) the duration of the intervention was ≥ 8 weeks to ensure a meaningful training duration.ResultsFourteen studies met the inclusion criteria (seven combined strength training with running, four with cycling, and three with rowing or cross-country skiing). These studies indicated that concurrent strength and endurance training generally increases parameters associated with strength and endurance performance in female participants, while several other health benefits such as, e.g., improved body composition and blood lipid profile were reported in individual studies. The presence of an "interference effect" in females could not be assessed from the included studies as this was not the focus of any included research and single-mode training groups were not always included alongside concurrent training groups. Importantly, the influence of concurrent training on fast-force production was limited, while the unique circumstances affecting females were not considered/reported in most studies. Overall study quality was low to moderate.ConclusionConcurrent strength and endurance training appears to be beneficial in increasing strength and endurance capacity in females; however, multiple research paradigms must be explored to better understand the influence of concurrent training modalities in females. Future research should explore the influence of concurrent strength and endurance training on fast-force production, the possible presence of an "interference effect" in athletic populations, and the influence of unique circumstances, such as hormone profile, on training responses and adaptations.

Project description:Strength training is an important means for performance development in young rowers. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a 9-week equal volume heavy-resistance strength training (HRST) versus strength endurance training (SET) in addition to regular rowing training on primary (e.g., maximal strength/power) and secondary outcomes (e.g., balance) in young rowers. Twenty-six female elite adolescent rowers were assigned to an HRST (n = 12; age: 13.2 ± 0.5 yrs; maturity-offset: +2.0 ± 0.5 yrs) or a SET group (n = 14; age: 13.1 ± 0.5 yrs; maturity-offset: +2.1 ± 0.5 yrs). HRST and SET comprised lower- (i.e., leg press/knee flexion/extension), upper-limbs (i.e., bench press/pull; lat-pull down), and complex exercises (i.e., rowing ergometer). HRST performed four sets with 12 repetitions per set at an intensity of 75-95% of the one-repetition maximum (1-RM). SET conducted four sets with 30 repetitions per set at 50-60% of the 1-RM. Training volume was matched for overall repetitions × intensity × training per week. Pre-post training, tests were performed for the assessment of primary [i.e., maximal strength (e.g., bench pull/knee flexion/extension 1-RM/isometric handgrip test), muscle power (e.g., medicine-ball push test, triple hop, drop jump, and countermovement jump), anaerobic endurance (400-m run), sport-specific performance (700-m rowing ergometer trial)] and secondary outcomes [dynamic balance (Y-balance test), change-of-direction (CoD) speed (multistage shuttle-run test)]. Adherence rate was >87% and one athlete of each group dropped out. Overall, 24 athletes completed the study and no test or training-related injuries occurred. Significant group × time interactions were observed for maximal strength, muscle power, anaerobic endurance, CoD speed, and sport-specific performance (p ? 0.05; 0.45 ? d ? 1.11). Post hoc analyses indicated larger gains in maximal strength and muscle power following HRST (p ? 0.05; 1.81 ? d ? 3.58) compared with SET (p ? 0.05; 1.04 ? d ? 2.30). Furthermore, SET (p ? 0.01; d = 2.08) resulted in larger gains in sport-specific performance compared with HRST (p < 0.05; d = 1.3). Only HRST produced significant pre-post improvements for anaerobic endurance and CoD speed (p ? 0.05; 1.84 ? d ? 4.76). In conclusion, HRST in addition to regular rowing training was more effective than SET to improve selected measures of physical fitness (i.e., maximal strength, muscle power, anaerobic endurance, and CoD speed) and SET was more effective than HRST to enhance sport-specific performance gains in female elite young rowers.

Project description:Respiratory/inspiratory muscle training (RMT/IMT) has been proposed to improve the endurance performance of athletes in normoxia. In recent years, due to the increased use of hypoxic training method among athletes, the RMT applicability has also been tested as a method to minimize adverse effects since hyperventilation may cause respiratory muscle fatigue during prolonged exercise in hypoxia. We performed a review in order to determine factors potentially affecting the change in endurance performance in hypoxia after RMT in healthy subjects. A comprehensive search was done in the electronic databases MEDLINE and Google Scholar including keywords: "RMT/IMT," and/or "endurance performance," and/or "altitude" and/or "hypoxia." Seven appropriate studies were found until April 2018. Analysis of the studies showed that two RMT methods were used in the protocols: respiratory muscle endurance (RME) (isocapnic hyperpnea: commonly 10-30', 3-5 d/week) in three of the seven studies, and respiratory muscle strength (RMS) (Powerbreathe device: commonly 2 × 30 reps at 50% MIP (maximal inspiratory pressure), 5-7 d/week) in the remaining four studies. The duration of the protocols ranged from 4 to 8 weeks, and it was found in synthesis that during exercise in hypoxia, RMT promoted (1) reduced respiratory muscle fatigue, (2) delayed respiratory muscle metaboreflex activation, (3) better maintenance of SaO2 and blood flow to locomotor muscles. In general, no increases of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) were described. Ventilatory function improvements (maximal inspiratory pressure) achieved by using RMT fostered the capacity to adapt to hypoxia and minimized the impact of respiratory stress during the acclimatization stage in comparison with placebo/sham. In conclusion, RMT was found to elicit general positive effects mainly on respiratory efficiency and breathing patterns, lower dyspneic perceptions and improved physical performance in conditions of hypoxia. Thus, this method is recommended to be used as a pre-exposure tool for strengthening respiratory muscles and minimizing the adverse effects caused by hypoxia related hyperventilation. Future studies will assess these effects in elite athletes.

Dataset Information

Best Time of Day for Strength and Endurance Training to Improve Health and Performance? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Registration

Publications

Best Time of Day for Strength and Endurance Training to Improve Health and Performance? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets