Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men.
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Jul; 33 Suppl 1:S130-S139.JS

Abstract

Gomes, GK, Franco, CM, Nunes, PRP, and Orsatti, FL. High-frequency resistance training is not more effective than low-frequency resistance training in increasing muscle mass and strength in well-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S130-S139, 2019-We studied the effects of 2 different weekly frequency resistance training (RT) protocols over 8 weeks on muscle strength and muscle hypertrophy in well-trained men. Twenty-three subjects (age: 26.2 ± 4.2 years; RT experience: 6.9 ± 3.1 years) were randomly allocated into the 2 groups: low-frequency resistance training (LFRT, n = 12) or high-frequency resistance training (HFRT, n = 11). The LFRT performed a split-body routine, training each specific muscle group once a week. The HFRT performed a total-body routine, training all muscle groups every session. Both groups performed the same number of sets (10-15 sets) and exercises (1-2 exercise) per week, 8-12 repetitions maximum (70-80% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM]), 5 times per week. Muscle strength (bench press and squat 1RM) and lean tissue mass (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) were assessed before and at the end of the study. Results showed that both groups improved (p < 0.001) muscle strength {LFRT and HFRT: bench press = 5.6 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-9.4) and 9.7 kg (95% CI: 4.6-14.9) and squat = 8.0 kg (95% CI: 2.7-13.2) and 12.0 kg (95% CI: 5.1-18.1), respectively} and lean tissue mass (p = 0.007) (LFRT and HFRT: total body lean mass = 0.5 kg [95% CI: 0.0-1.1] and 0.8 kg [95% CI: 0.0-1.6], respectively) with no difference between groups (bench press, p = 0.168; squat, p = 0.312, and total body lean mass, p = 0.619). Thus, HFRT and LFRT are similar overload strategies for promoting muscular adaptation in well-trained subjects when the sets and intensity are equated per week.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Exercise Biology Research Group (BioEx), Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro (UFTM), Uberaba, Brazil.Exercise Biology Research Group (BioEx), Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro (UFTM), Uberaba, Brazil.Exercise Biology Research Group (BioEx), Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro (UFTM), Uberaba, Brazil.Exercise Biology Research Group (BioEx), Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro (UFTM), Uberaba, Brazil. Department of Sport Sciences, Health Science Institute, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro (UFTM), Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

29489727

Citation

Gomes, Gederson K., et al. "High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 33 Suppl 1, 2019, pp. S130-S139.
Gomes GK, Franco CM, Nunes PRP, et al. High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33 Suppl 1:S130-S139.
Gomes, G. K., Franco, C. M., Nunes, P. R. P., & Orsatti, F. L. (2019). High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33 Suppl 1, S130-S139. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002559
Gomes GK, et al. High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33 Suppl 1:S130-S139. PubMed PMID: 29489727.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. AU - Gomes,Gederson K, AU - Franco,Cristiane M, AU - Nunes,Paulo Ricardo P, AU - Orsatti,Fábio L, PY - 2018/3/1/pubmed PY - 2019/11/9/medline PY - 2018/3/1/entrez SP - S130 EP - S139 JF - Journal of strength and conditioning research JO - J Strength Cond Res VL - 33 Suppl 1 N2 - Gomes, GK, Franco, CM, Nunes, PRP, and Orsatti, FL. High-frequency resistance training is not more effective than low-frequency resistance training in increasing muscle mass and strength in well-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S130-S139, 2019-We studied the effects of 2 different weekly frequency resistance training (RT) protocols over 8 weeks on muscle strength and muscle hypertrophy in well-trained men. Twenty-three subjects (age: 26.2 ± 4.2 years; RT experience: 6.9 ± 3.1 years) were randomly allocated into the 2 groups: low-frequency resistance training (LFRT, n = 12) or high-frequency resistance training (HFRT, n = 11). The LFRT performed a split-body routine, training each specific muscle group once a week. The HFRT performed a total-body routine, training all muscle groups every session. Both groups performed the same number of sets (10-15 sets) and exercises (1-2 exercise) per week, 8-12 repetitions maximum (70-80% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM]), 5 times per week. Muscle strength (bench press and squat 1RM) and lean tissue mass (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) were assessed before and at the end of the study. Results showed that both groups improved (p < 0.001) muscle strength {LFRT and HFRT: bench press = 5.6 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-9.4) and 9.7 kg (95% CI: 4.6-14.9) and squat = 8.0 kg (95% CI: 2.7-13.2) and 12.0 kg (95% CI: 5.1-18.1), respectively} and lean tissue mass (p = 0.007) (LFRT and HFRT: total body lean mass = 0.5 kg [95% CI: 0.0-1.1] and 0.8 kg [95% CI: 0.0-1.6], respectively) with no difference between groups (bench press, p = 0.168; squat, p = 0.312, and total body lean mass, p = 0.619). Thus, HFRT and LFRT are similar overload strategies for promoting muscular adaptation in well-trained subjects when the sets and intensity are equated per week. SN - 1533-4287 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/29489727/High_Frequency_Resistance_Training_Is_Not_More_Effective_Than_Low_Frequency_Resistance_Training_in_Increasing_Muscle_Mass_and_Strength_in_Well_Trained_Men_ L2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002559 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -