Dataset Information

Effects of Cluster Sets and Rest-Redistribution on Mechanical Responses to Back Squats in Trained Men.

ABSTRACT: Eight resistance-trained men completed three protocols separated by 48-96 hours. Each protocol included 36 repetitions with the same rest duration, but the frequency and length of rest periods differed. The cluster sets of four (CS4) protocol included 30 s of rest after the 4th, 8th, 16th, 20th, 28th, and 32nd repetition in addition to 120 s of rest after the 12th and 24th repetition. For the other two protocols, the total 420 s rest time of CS4 was redistributed to include nine sets of four repetitions (RR4) with 52.5 s of rest after every four repetitions, or 36 sets of single repetitions (RR1) with 12 s of rest after every repetition. Mean (MF) and peak (PF) force, velocity (MV and PV), and power output (MP and PP) were measured during 36 repetitions and were collapsed into 12 repetitions for analysis. Repeated measures ANOVA 3 (protocol) x 12 (repetition) showed a protocol x repetition interaction for PF, MV, PV, MP, and PP (p-values from <0.001 to 0.012). No interaction or main effect was present for MF. During RR1, MV, PV, MP, and PP were maintained, but decreased throughout every 4-repetition sequence during CS4 and RR4. During CS4 and RR4, PF was less following a rest period compared to subsequent repetitions, whereas PF was maintained during RR1. These data indicate that rest redistribution results in similar average kinetics and kinematics, but if total rest time is redistributed to create shorter but more frequent sets, kinetics and kinematics may remain more constant.

SUBMITTER: Tufano JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5548153 | biostudies-other | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The use of flywheel devices has increased in popularity during the last few years. Flywheel training is an attractive alternative to traditional resistance exercise because it allows for the loading stimulus to be manipulated. Some of the benefits associated with flywheel training include increases in muscle hypertrophy, muscular strength and reductions in injury risk. Nevertheless, there is a lack of research about how basic training variables [i.e., rest intervals (RI) between sets], or variables associated with manipulation of the loading stimulus (i.e., different inertial loads), influence the acute responses during a flywheel session. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the influence of three different RI between sets (1, 2, or 3 min), during a flywheel squat session with two different inertial loads: light (0.025 kg?m2) and high (0.075 kg?m2). Twenty-three participants performed six exercise sessions (two inertial loads × three RI) consisting of four sets of 11 repetitions. Concentric and eccentric power, lactate concentration ([La]) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured during the exercise session, and delayed onset muscular soreness (DOMS) were recorded 24 h post-exercise. Both concentric (9.1 and 22.1% at light and high load respectively; p = 0.022 and 0.005) and eccentric peak power (17.5% at high load; p = 0.02) decreased across sets when the 1 min RI was used. Concentric peak power was decreased (11.1%, p = 0.041) from the 2 min RI only with the high inertial load. RPE was higher during the 1 min compared with the 3 min RI protocol when using the high inertial load (p = 0.028). [La] was higher when using the 2 min RI compared with the 3 min RI at light load (p = 0.03). In conclusion, during flywheel training sessions, a short RI (1 min) was insufficient to maintain power output across all four sets and was linked to greater perceptual variables. A 2 min RI allowed for power to be maintained, but only when training with light inertial loads. Based on these results, coaches should consider prescribing 3 min RI's when performing flywheel squat exercises regardless the inertial load. In contrast, when using 2 min RI's the inertial load should be light.

Project description:BackgroundIn 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.MethodsTwenty-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.ResultsBoth 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).ConclusionWe 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.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of workplace active rest programme (WARP) on chronic low back pain (LBP) among office workers.DesignA closed cohort, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial was conducted. The total duration of the study was 16 weeks (4 weeks for each step). Sequence allocation was randomised, but no one was blinded.SettingThis study was conducted in three offices in a Japanese electronics company. One office was for the administrative department, the others are for the engineering department.ParticipantsWe recruited 29 office workers with LBP greater than 3 months. LBP due to specific injury or disease was excluded. The median age was 38 years, and 26 (90%) were male. All participants completed the study.InterventionsIn the intervention phase, participants performed WARP comprising frequent stand-up and individualised brief exercise/physical activity during work. Physical therapists held an LBP workshop and developed tailor-made programmes before introducing WARP. We instructed participants to perform WARP at five timings during work. Control phase was set before the intervention and participants stayed as usual.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was pain intensity of LBP assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory. The secondary outcomes were work productivity loss measured using the Work Limitations Questionnaire, LBP disability assessed using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, psychosocial subscale assessed using the STarT Back Screening Tool and physical activity measured using triaxial accelerometers. These outcomes were collected at baseline and at 4-month follow-up evaluation.ResultsIn the intention-to-treat analysis, WARP did not show any significant effects on pain intensity (β, 0.01; 95% CI -0.50 to 0.52) and on the secondary outcomes. The median adherence to WARP was 28.6% (IQR, 16.8-41.1), which was equal to 1.43 times per day. No adverse effect was observed.ConclusionsThe present study was unable to confirm the effectiveness of active rest in improving LBP. Hence, further study needs to investigate its effectiveness.Trial registration numberUMIN000033210.

Dataset Information

Effects of Cluster Sets and Rest-Redistribution on Mechanical Responses to Back Squats in Trained Men.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets