The short- and long-term effects of resistance training with different stability requirements.

Atle Hole Saeterbakken,David George Behm,Hilde Bremseth Bardstu,Alexander Olsen,Vidar Andersen,Dragan Mirkov

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0214302

Atle Hole Saeterbakken, David George Behm + Show 4 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214302

Copy DOI

Journal: PloS one	Publication Date: Apr 1, 2019
Citations: 16	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Memorial University of Newfoundland, Vestlandsforsking

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term effects of resistance training (RT) with different stability requirements. Fifty-nine men underwent a 3-week familiarization period followed by a 7-week training period. During familiarization, all participants trained four sessions of squats with a Smith machine, free weights and free weights standing on a wobble board. After week-3, participants were randomized into a low (Smith machine), medium (Free-weight) or high (Wobble board) stability RT program, and Control group. All participants were tested pre-, after week-3 and post-intervention. Ten repetition maximum (10RM), rate of force development (RFD), electromyography (EMG) and maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) were tested in all three squat conditions in addition to countermovement jump (CMJ) on stable and unstable surfaces, and muscle thickness. After familiarization, greater 10RM loads (21.8–27.3%), MVIC (7.4–13.5%), RFD (29.7–43.8%) and CMJ (4.9–8.5%) were observed in all conditions. Between week 3 and 10, the Free-weight and Wobble board groups similarly improved 10RM in all conditions. Smith machine group demonstrated greater improvement in the trained exercise than the medium and high stability exercises. All training groups showed similar improvement in muscle thickness, RFD and MVIC. There was no CMJ improvement on the stable surface, but the Wobble board group demonstrated significantly greater improvement on the unstable surface. In conclusion, low, medium or high stability RT resulted in similar improvements in trained and non-trained testing conditions except for greater CMJ on the unstable surface in the Wobble group. Greater 10RM strength in trained than non-trained exercise was only observed in low stability group. Familiarization was associated with substantial improvements in 10RM and CMJ, with greater improvement associated with higher stability requirements. These findings suggest that high stability can increase strength, muscle thickness and explosive measurements similar to training with lower stability.

Highlights

Task specificity or training specificity in resistance training leads to greater strength gains when the tests and training involve similar tasks [1,2,3]
Studies examining the acute effects of instability have demonstrated decreased dynamic strength [11], force output [12, 13], rate of force development (RFD) [12] and jump height [14] when unstable surfaces are used compared to stable surfaces
A randomized, controlled study was used to examine the effects of three squatting exercises with different stability requirements by assessing 10 repetitions maximum (10RM), maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), RFD, countermovement jump (CMJ), muscle thickness and EMG activity

Summary

Introduction

Task specificity or training specificity in resistance training leads to greater strength gains when the tests and training involve similar tasks [1,2,3]. Studies examining the acute effects of instability have demonstrated decreased dynamic strength [11], force output [12, 13], rate of force development (RFD) [12] and jump height [14] when unstable surfaces are used compared to stable surfaces. This has led several researchers to argue that instability in resistance may provide a substantially lower stimulus for strength-training adaptions compared to traditional approaches [8, 15, 16]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion