Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of the current recommendations for increasing strength compared to other, less time consuming programs in untrained sedentary and recreationally active females. METHODS: Forty-six female subjects (age = 22.7±4.1 yrs) were randomly assigned to one of four groups that determined the resistance training program they would follow for 6 weeks. All resistance training programs utilized the same two exercises on the same equipment: leg extension and leg curl. The four training groups included: a traditional group (HIGH), two blood flow restriction (BFR) groups (BFR-1 and BFR-2), and a minimalist group (MIN). HIGH group followed ACSM guidelines for increasing strength, which was comprised of 3 sets of 10 repetitions 3x/wk at 50% of 1RM. BFR-1 program consisted of 4 sets of 30, 15, 15, 15 reps 1x/wk at 20% of 1RM. BFR-2 program consisted of 4 sets of 30, 15, 15, 15 reps 2x/wk at 20% of 1RM. MIN program consisted of 1 set to failure 1x/wk at 75% of 1RM. Weight was added each week if subject completed the previous weeks program with proper form. Prior to and following 6 week training period subjects were tested for 1RM strength on leg extension and leg curl exercises. All subjects were at least 8 hours fasted as well as hydrated (determined using clinical urine refractometer) for pre- and post-testing. RESULTS: One-way ANOVA found no between-group differences in any of the outcome measures of interest at baseline. Repeated measures ANOVA found a significant time main effect for 1RM (p < 0.01) with all groups improving in strength for leg extension and leg curl. There was also a significant condition difference (p < 0.01) for the MIN group in the 1RM for the leg extension, representing that increases in leg extension 1RM by MIN group was significantly greater than all other conditions. CONCLUSION: All training programs were effective at increasing 1RM strength for the leg extension and leg curl. Strength increases by the MIN group for the leg extension were significantly greater than all other groups. These results indicate that a less frequent, more time efficient program is more effective than the current recommendations for increasing strength and it may be an alternative training approach for those who want to minimize the time spent for training but still maximize benefits.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.