Are Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Stress Greater in Isometric or in Dynamic Resistance Exercise?

Anastasios Kounoupis,Stavros Papadopoulos,Nikiforos Galanis,Andreas Zafeiridis,Konstantina Dipla

doi:10.3390/sports8040041

Anastasios Kounoupis, Stavros Papadopoulos + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/sports8040041

Copy DOI

Journal: Sports	Publication Date: Mar 28, 2020
Citations: 9	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Abstract

Medical and sports medicine associations are reluctant to endorse isometric exercise to the same extent as dynamic resistance exercise (RE). The major concern is the fear of greater increases in blood pressure (BP) that might be associated with isometric exercise. This review comprehensively presents all human studies that directly compared the magnitude of hemodynamic responses between isometric and dynamic RE. We also discuss possible mechanisms controlling BP-response and cardiovascular adjustments during both types of RE. The most prominent finding was that isometric and dynamic RE using small-muscle mass evoke equal increases in BP; however, the circulatory adjustments contributing to this response are different in dynamic and isometric RE. In contrast, studies using large-muscle mass report inconsistent results for the magnitude of BP-response between the two types of RE. Thus, when the same muscles and workloads are used, the increase in BP during isometric and dynamic RE is more comparable to what is commonly believed. However, it should be noted that only a few studies equalized the workload in two types of RE, most used small sample sizes, and all studies employed healthy participants. More studies are needed to compare the cardiovascular risks associated with isometric and dynamic RE, especially in individuals with chronic disease.

Highlights

Resistance exercise (RE) has been considered an integral component of exercise training programs for the promotion of health [1,2]
Chapman et al [36], using two-leg large extension exercise, equated the intensity (50% MVC), the duration (1 min), and the force generated during one isometric resistance exercise (RE) protocol and three dynamic RE protocols that varied in the displacement range of the load
The cardiovascular responses were monitored continuously and compared between dynamic (30% of MVC for 180 s and 60% of MVC for 90 s at a rate of 1 repetition/s) and isometric (30% of MVC for 90 s) handgrip exercises equalized for total workload

Summary

Introduction

Resistance exercise (RE) has been considered an integral component of exercise training programs for the promotion of health [1,2]. RE training causes central and peripheral adaptations to the human body, such as structural and morphological changes in the heart [1,3,8,9], improvements in vascular endothelial function [3,10], and reductions in resting blood pressure [3,4,6,10]. RE training has been associated with favorable changes in body composition and muscle profile, such as increases in muscle mass and strength and improvements in glucose and fat metabolism, as well as in insulin sensitivity [1,2,3,10,11]. RE is performed using either dynamic or isometric (static) contractions. Resistance isometric (static) contraction is manifested by an increase in muscle tension and force generation with no significant alterations in the muscle’s belly length and no limb movement, while dynamic (isotonic/isokinetic)

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion