Increasing set volume relative to baseline does not augment skeletal muscle adaptations when compared to maintenance of baseline training volume in recreationally trained individuals

PURPOSE

This study compared the effects of prescribing an increased number of sets relative to baseline (ITV) to a maintenance of baseline training volume (BTV), in previously trained individuals.

METHODS

Forty-two adults with more than 6 months of elbow flexion resistance training experience had each arm randomized to either the ITV or BTV condition. Participants performed 2-weekly sessions of unilateral standing dumbbell elbow flexion exercise for 12 weeks, 8 of which were supervised. Muscle thickness of the elbow flexors at 50, 60, and 70% the distance of the upper arm and one repetition-maximum (1RM) strength for the unilateral standing dumbbell elbow flexion exercise were assessed pre- and post-intervention.

RESULTS

For the 50% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = 0.022 (95% CI - 0.096, 0.140)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For the 60% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = - 0.010 (95% CI - 0.155, 0.96)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For the 70% site, there was no evidence that the changes were different between BTV and ITV [∆BTV vs ∆ITV (cm) = 0.004 (95% CI - 0.092, 0.101)]. However, there was evidence that both conditions observed a greater change compared to the control. For changes in 1RM, there was evidence that the change was greater in the BTV [∆BTV vs ∆Control (kg) = 1.915 (95% CI 1.219, 2.611)] and ITV [∆ITV vs ∆Control (kg) = 1.780 (95% CI 1.084, 2.475)] conditions compared to control.

CONCLUSION

Prescribing an increased dose of sets relative to baseline did not augment muscular adaptations when compared to a maintenance of BTV, in recreationally trained individuals. Both training conditions were similarly effective in promoting significant increases in muscle thickness and 1RM strength of the elbow flexors.

Training volume increases or maintenance based on previous volume: the effects on muscular adaptations in trained males

This study investigated the effects of increasing previous resistance training (RT) weekly set volume by 30% (G30) and 60% (G60) on muscle hypertrophy and strength. Fifty-five resistance-trained men were randomly allocated to the experimental groups, whereas 29 completed the study, as follows: control group (CON): n = 10, G30: n = 10, and G60: n = 9. Participants underwent a lower body RT program twice a week for 8 wk. We assessed pre- and poststudy thigh region-of-interest fat-free mass (ROI-FFM), anterior thigh muscle thickness (MT) at two sites: proximal (PMT) and distal (DMT) and their sum (ΣMT), one-repetition maximum (1RM), and strength-endurance via repetitions to failure (RTF) at 70% of 1RM. ROI-FFM and MT demonstrated a significant increase from pre- to posttraining (main time effect, P < 0.001) (ΔΣMT CON: 1.07 cm, G30: 0.76 cm, and G60: 0.70 cm; ΔROI-FFM CON: 1.57 kg, G30: 0.47 kg, and G60: 1.55 kg). All groups increased back squat 1RM (P < 0.0001). However, the main group effect (P < 0.0268) indicated that the CON group showcased a greater overall 1RM (174.7 kg), than the G30 (159.0 kg) and G60 (149.0 kg). Only the G30 group increased RTF at the posttest (CON: 0.13 reps, G30: 5.45 reps, and G60: -0.41 reps) (P < 0.0263). Our findings suggest that trained males can experience significant muscle growth and strength adaptations while maintaining their previous weekly set number above a certain weekly set volume threshold.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Increasing previous resistance training volume by 30% (G30), 60% (G60), or maintenance (CON) on muscular adaptations in trained individuals. Interestingly, CON group resulted in the greatest overall 1RM strength, whereas G30 showed the highest increase in repetitions to failure, with no differences between groups in muscle mass size. These findings suggest that more is not always better for muscle adaptations in a trained cohort, highlighting muscle growth across a wide range of weekly set numbers.

Bigger Calves from Doing Higher Resistance Training Volume?

We compared the effects of different weekly calf training sets on muscle size changes. Sixty-one untrained young women performed a calf training program for 6 weeks, 3 d·wk-1, with differences in resistance training volume. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups: 6-SET, 9-SET, and 12-SET weekly calf training sets. The calf raise exercise was performed in sets of 15-20 repetitions maximum. The muscle thickness measurements of medial gastrocnemius (MG), lateral gastrocnemius (LG), and soleus (SOL) were taken via B-mode ultrasound. We used the sum of the three-muscle thickness as a proxy for the triceps surae (TSSUM). The 12-SET group elicited greater increases than the 6-SET in LG (6-SET=+ 8.1% vs. 12-SET=+ 14.3%; P=0.017), SOL (6-SET=+ 6.7% vs. 12-SET=+ 12.7%; P=0.024), and TSSUM (6-SET=+ 6.9% vs. 12-SET=+ 12.0%; P=0.005), but there was no significant difference in MG changes (6-SET=+ 6.6% vs. 12-SET=+ 9.9%; P=0.067). There were no significant differences when comparing 9-SET vs. 6-SET and 12-SET (P≥0.099). Although all groups experienced calf muscle hypertrophy, our results suggest that the higher dose range may optimize triceps surae muscle size gains.

Effects of Different Weekly Set Progressions on Muscular Adaptations in Trained Males: Is There a Dose-Response Effect?

PURPOSE

This study investigated the effect of progressively adding sets for the lower limb every 2 wk versus performing a constant set volume in resistance-trained males.

METHODS

Thirty-one resistance-trained males (age = 24.4 ± 2.9 yr, height = 175.5 ± 6.5 cm, body mass = 80.1 ± 9.4 kg, body fat = 14.4% ± 3.1%, resistance training [RT] experience = 5.1 ± 2.2 yr; one-repetition maximum [1RM] barbell back squat: body mass ratio = 1.7 ± 0.1 a.u.) were randomly allocated into a constant group (CG, n = 10), a four-set progression group (4SG, n = 10) or a six-set progression group (6SG, n = 11). After a 2-wk washout period and another 2-wk familiarization period, participants performed a lower-limb training program twice a week for 12 wk. Maximum dynamic strength (1RM) in the barbell back squat, vastus lateralis cross-sectional area, and the sum of lateral thigh muscle thickness at 30%, 50%, and 70% of the femur length were assessed at baseline and after the 12-wk training program.

RESULTS

Regarding 1RM, multiple comparisons revealed that 6SG elicited higher muscle strength gains than 4SG ( P = 0.002) and CG ( P < 0.0001), and 4SG had greater improvements than CG ( P = 0.023). Cross-sectional area and sum of lateral thigh muscle thickness showed no between-group differences ( P = 0.067 and P = 0.076, respectively). However, an inspection of 95% confidence intervals suggests a potential dose-response relationship, with results appearing to plateau in the higher volume conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that progressively adding four or six sets per week every 2 wk elicited greater lower-limb strength in resistance-trained individuals over a 12-wk training period. Although our findings indicate a possible small benefit for higher volume conditions regarding hypertrophic adaptations in this population, the limited certainty of our findings warrants caution.

Effects of Acute Loading Induced Fatigability, Acute Serum Hormone Responses and Training Volume to Individual Hypertrophy and Maximal Strength during 10 Weeks of Strength Training

This study investigated whether a strength training session-induced acute fatigue is related to individuals' strength training adaptations in maximal force and/or muscle hypertrophy, and whether acute responses in serum testosterone (T) and growth hormone (GH) concentrations during the training sessions would be associated with individual neuromuscular adaptations. 26 males completed the 10-week strength-training intervention, which included fatiguing dynamic leg press acute loading bouts (5 x 10 RM) at weeks two, four, six, and ten. Blood samples were collected before and after the loading and after 24h of recovery for serum T, GH, and cortisol (C) concentrations at weeks 2, 6, and 10. The cross-sectional area of the vastus lateralis was measured by ultrasonography. Isometric force measurements were performed before and immediately after loadings, and loading-induced acute decrease in maximal force was reported as the fatigue percentage. The subjects were split into three groups according to the degree of training-induced muscle hypertrophy after the training period. Increases in isometric force were significant for High Responders (HR, n = 10) (by 24.3 % ± 17.2, p = 0.035) and Medium Responders (MR, n = 7) (by 23.8 % ± 5.5, p = 0.002), whereas the increase of 26.2 % (±16.5) in Low Responders (LR, n = 7) was not significant. The amount of work (cm + s) increased significantly at every measurement point in all the groups. A significant correlation was observed between the fatigue percentage and relative changes in isometric force after the training period for the whole group (R = 0.475, p = 0.022) and separately only in HR (R = 0.643, p = 0.049). Only the HR group showed increased acute serum GH concentrations at every measurement point. There was also a significant acute increase in serum T for HR at weeks 6 and 10. HR showed the strongest correlation between acute loading-induced fatigue and isometric force gains. HR was also more sensitive to acute increases in serum concentrations of T and GH after the loading. Acute fatigue and serum GH concentrations may be indicators of responsiveness to muscle strength gain and, to some extent, muscle hypertrophy.

Hybrid-type, multicomponent interval training upregulates musculoskeletal fitness of adults with overweight and obesity in a volume-dependent manner: A 1-year dose-response randomised controlled trial

This study examined the dose-response effects of a 1-year hybrid-type, multicomponent interval training programme (DoIT) on various musculoskeletal fitness parameters in inactive overweight and obese adults in a gym setting. Ninety-seven middle-aged (44.8 ± 5.2 years) individuals with overweight/obesity (31.2 ± 5.7 kg/m²) (66% female) were randomly assigned to the following groups: (i) no-intervention control (CON, n = 29), (ii) DoIT performed once weekly (DoIT-1, n = 24), (iii) DoIT performed twice weekly (DoIT-2, n = 23) and (iv) DoIT performed thrice weekly (DoIT-3, n = 21). DoIT was a time-efficient, intermittent-based, multicomponent exercise protocol using progressive loaded fundamental movement patterns with prescribed work-to-rest intervals (1:3-2:1) in a circuit format (2-3 rounds). Muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, passive range of motion (PRoM), static balance and functional movement screen (FMS®) were assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 months following intervention. At post-training, all exercise groups exhibited superior changes than CON in (i) muscular strength (+13%-38%, p < 0.001); (ii) muscular endurance (+42%-159%, p < 0.001); (iii) flexibility (+12%-42%, p < 0.001); (iv) PRoM (+6%-50%, p = 0.001-0.026); (v) static balance (+61%-163%, p < 0.001); and (vi) FMS (+18%-39%, p < 0.001). Although a single exercise session/week improved musculoskeletal fitness, changes demonstrated a step-wise improvement with two and three sessions/week suggesting a dose-dependent response. The response rate to training was 100% for all exercise groups. These findings suggest that a multicomponent exercise approach incorporating bodyweight drills and resistance-based alternative modes performed under real-world conditions may improve several musculoskeletal fitness indicators in a dose-dependent manner in inactive, middle-aged adults with overweight/obesity.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03759951.

A Systematic Review of the Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy

The main goal of this study was to compare responses to moderate and high training volumes aimed at inducing muscle hypertrophy. A literature search on 3 databases (Pubmed, Scopus and Chocrane Library) was conducted in January 2021. After analyzing 2083 resultant articles, studies were included if they met the following inclusion criteria: a) studies were randomized controlled trials (with the number of sets explicitly reported), b) interventions lasted at least six weeks, c) participants had a minimum of one year of resistance training experience, d) participants’ age ranged from 18 to 35 years, e) studies reported direct measurements of muscle thickness and/or the cross-sectional area, and f) studies were published in peer-review journals. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis, whereas just six were included in the quantitative analysis. All participants were divided into three groups: “low” (<12 weekly sets), “moderate” (12-20 weekly sets) and “high” volume (>20 weekly sets). According to the results of this meta-analysis, there were no differences between moderate and high training volume responses for the quadriceps (p = 0.19) and the biceps brachii (p = 0.59). However, it appears that a high training volume is better to induce muscle mass gains in the triceps brachii (p = 0.01). According to the results of this review, a range of 12-20 weekly sets per muscle group may be an optimum standard recommendation for increasing muscle hypertrophy in young, trained men.

The role of the neural stimulus in regulating skeletal muscle hypertrophy

Resistance training is frequently performed with the goal of stimulating muscle hypertrophy. Due to the key roles motor unit recruitment and mechanical tension play to induce muscle growth, when programming, the manipulation of the training variables is oriented to provoke the correct stimulus. Although it is known that the nervous system is responsible for the control of motor units and active muscle force, muscle hypertrophy researchers and trainers tend to only focus on the adaptations of the musculotendinous unit and not in the nervous system behaviour. To better guide resistance exercise prescription for muscle hypertrophy and aiming to delve into the mechanisms that maximize this goal, this review provides evidence-based considerations for possible effects of neural behaviour on muscle growth when programming resistance training, and future neurophysiological measurement that should be tested when training to increase muscle mass. Combined information from the neural and muscular structures will allow to understand the exact adaptations of the muscle in response to a given input (neural drive to the muscle). Changes at different levels of the nervous system will affect the control of motor units and mechanical forces during resistance training, thus impacting the potential hypertrophic adaptations. Additionally, this article addresses how neural adaptations and fatigue accumulation that occur when resistance training may influence the hypertrophic response and propose neurophysiological assessments that may improve our understanding of resistance training variables that impact on muscular adaptations.

Resistance training variable manipulations is less relevant than intrinsic biology in affecting muscle fiber hypertrophy

We aimed to investigate whether muscle fiber cross-sectional area (fCSA) and associated molecular processes could be differently affected at the group and individual level by manipulating resistance training (RT) variables. Twenty resistance-trained subjects had each leg randomly allocated to either a standard RT (RT-CON: without specific variables manipulations) or a variable RT (RT-VAR: manipulation of load, volume, muscle action, and rest interval at each RT session). Muscle fCSA, satellite cell (SC) pool, myonuclei content, and gene expression were assessed before and after training (chronic effect). Gene expression was assessed 24h after the last training session (acute effect). RT-CON and RT-VAR increased fCSA and myonuclei domain in type I and II fibers after training (P < 0.05). SC and myonuclei content did not change for both conditions (P > 0.05). Pax-7, MyoD, MMP-2 and COL3A1 (chronic) and MGF, Pax-7, and MMP-9 (acute) increased similar for RT-CON and RT-VAR (P < 0.05). The increase in acute MyoG expression was significantly higher for the RT-VAR than RT-CON (P < 0.05). Significant correlation between RT-CON and RT-VAR for the fCSA changes (r = 0.89). fCSA changes were also correlated to satellite cells (r = 0.42) and myonuclei (r = 0.50) changes. Heatmap analyses showed coupled changes in fCSA, SC, and myonuclei responses at the individual level, regardless of the RT protocol. The high between and low within-subject variability regardless of RT protocol suggests that the intrinsic biological factors seem to be more important to explain the magnitude of fCSA gains in resistance-trained subjects.

High Resistance-Training Volume Enhances Muscle Thickness in Resistance-Trained Men

ABSTRACT

Brigatto, FA, Lima, LEdM, Germano, MD, Aoki, MS, Braz, TV, and Lopes, CR. High resistance-training volume enhances muscle thickness in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 36(1): 22-30, 2022-This study investigated the effects of different volumes of resistance training (RT) (8 weeks of 16, 24, and 32 weekly sets per muscle group) on muscular strength and hypertrophy. Subjects were pair-matched according to baseline strength and then randomly assigned to 1 of 3 experimental groups: 16 weekly sets per muscle group (G16, n = 9), 24 weekly sets per muscle group (G24, n = 9), or 32 weekly sets per muscle group (G32, n = 9). All other RT variables (e.g., exercise performed, exercise order, weekly frequency, range of repetitions, rest interval between sets and exercises, etc.) were maintained constant. The total load lifted was calculated for every RT session to compare the accumulated external training load among experimental groups across the intervention period. Testing was conducted before intervention (pre) and after 8-week (post-8) periods for maximal voluntary muscle strength (1 repetition maximum [1RM] test for bench press and parallel back squat exercises) and muscle thickness (MT) of the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, and vastus lateralis. The major findings were as follows: (a) all RT volumes increased bench press and parallel back squat 1RM and (b) all RT volumes increased the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, and vastus lateralis MT. The magnitude of increase in 1RM and MT of the lower body when training with 32 weekly sets per muscle group was higher than for 16 weekly sets per muscle group. The magnitude of the increase in MTTB was higher when training with 32 weekly sets than for 16 weekly sets.

The Effect of Low-Load Resistance Training on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy in Trained Men: A Critically Appraised Topic

Clinical Scenario: Resistance training (RT) programs promote skeletal muscle hypertrophy through the progressive physiological stress applied to an individual. Currently, the vast majority of studies regarding the hypertrophic response to RT have focused on either sedentary or untrained individuals. This critically appraised topic focuses on the hypertrophic response to high- and low-load RT in resistance-trained men. Clinical Question: In experienced male weightlifters, does high-load RT lead to greater increases in muscle mass than low-load RT? Summary of Key Findings: Six studies met the inclusion criteria, while 4 studies were included in the analysis. Each of the 4 studies showed that low-load RT elicited hypertrophic gains similar to high-load RT when sets were taken to failure. Three of the studies were not volume equated, indicating a dose-response relationship between training volume-load and skeletal muscle hypertrophy. One of the studies was volume equated, indicating that skeletal muscle hypertrophy could be achieved at levels comparable to those observed in high-load protocols as a result of high levels of metabolic stress and the concomitant recruitment of high-threshold motor units that can occur during fatiguing contractions. Clinical Bottom Line: Evidence suggests that low-load training produces hypertrophic gains similar to those observed in high-load RT protocols when sets are taken to failure in resistance-trained men. Strength of Recommendation: There is moderate to strong evidence to suggest that low-load RT elicits hypertrophic gains similar to those observed in high-load RT protocols when sets are taken to failure in resistance-trained men.

The Effect and Dose-Response of Functional Electrical Stimulation Cycling Training on Spasticity in Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Background: To investigate the effect and dose-response of functional electrical stimulation cycling (FES-cycling) training on spasticity in the individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Method: Five electronic databases [PubMed, Scopus, Medline (Proquest), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)] were searched before September 2021. The human trials and studies of English language were only included. Two authors independently reviewed and extracted the searched studies. The primary outcome measure was spasticity assessed by Modified Ashworth Scale or Ashworth Scale for lower limbs. The secondary outcome measures were walking abilities, such as 6 Min Walk Test (6MWT), Timed Up and Go (TUG), and lower limbs muscle strength (LEMS). A subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the efficacious threshold number of training sessions. A meta-regression analysis was used to examine the linear relationship between the training sessions and the effect on spasticity. Results: A total of 764 studies were identified. After screening, 12 selected studies were used for the qualitative synthesis, in which eight of them were quantitatively analyzed. Eight studies included ninety-nine subjects in total with SCI (male: female = 83:16). The time since injury was from less than 4 weeks to 17 years. The age ranged from 20 to 67 years. American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment level of the number of participants was 59 for ASIA A, 11 for ASIA B, 18 for ASIA C, and 11 for ASIA D. There were 43 subjects with tetraplegia and 56 subjects with paraplegia. Spasticity decreased significantly (95% CI = - 1.538 to - 0.182, p = 0.013) in favor of FES-cycling training. The walking ability and LEMS also improved significantly in favor of FES-cycling training. The subgroup analysis showed that spasticity decreased significantly only in more than 20 training sessions (95% CI = - 1.749 to - 0.149, p = 0.020). The meta-regression analysis showed training sessions and spasticity were not significantly associated (coefficient = - 0.0025, SE = 0.0129, p = 0.849, R ² analog = 0.37). Conclusion: Functional electrical stimulation-cycling training can improve spasticity, walking ability, and the strength of the lower limbs in the individuals with SCI. The number of training sessions is not linearly related to the decrease of spasticity. Twenty sessions of FES-cycling training are required to obtain the efficacy to decrease spasticity.

Influence of resistance training load on measures of skeletal muscle hypertrophy and improvements in maximal strength and neuromuscular task performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis determined resistance training (RT) load effects on various muscle hypertrophy, strength, and neuromuscular performance task [e.g., countermovement jump (CMJ)] outcomes. Relevent studies comparing higher-load [>60% 1-repetition maximum (RM) or <15-RM] and lower-load (≤60% 1-RM or ≥ 15-RM) RT were identified, with 45 studies (from 4713 total) included in the meta-analysis. Higher- and lower-load RT induced similar muscle hypertrophy at the whole-body (lean/fat-free mass; [ES (95% CI) = 0.05 (-0.20 to 0.29), P = 0.70]), whole-muscle [ES = 0.06 (-0.11 to 0.24), P = 0.47], and muscle fibre [ES = 0.29 (-0.09 to 0.66), P = 0.13] levels. Higher-load RT further improved 1-RM [ES = 0.34 (0.15 to 0.52), P = 0.0003] and isometric [ES = 0.41 (0.07 to 0.76), P = 0.02] strength. The superiority of higher-load RT on 1-RM strength was greater in younger [ES = 0.34 (0.12 to 0.55), P = 0.002] versus older [ES = 0.20 (-0.00 to 0.41), P = 0.05] participants. Higher- and lower-load RT therefore induce similar muscle hypertrophy (at multiple physiological levels), while higher-load RT elicits superior 1-RM and isometric strength. The influence of RT loads on neuromuscular task performance is however unclear.

Effects of training frequency on muscular strength for trained men under volume matched conditions

Background

In 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.

Methods

Twenty-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.

Results

Both 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).

Conclusion

We 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.

The Effectiveness of Frequency-Based Resistance Training Protocols on Muscular Performance and Hypertrophy in Trained Males: A Critically Appraised Topic

Clinical Scenario: Manipulation of exercise variables in resistance training (RT) is an important component in the development of muscular strength, power, and hypertrophy. Currently, most research centers on untrained or recreationally trained subjects. This critically appraised topic focuses on studies that center on the well-trained subject with regard to frequency of training. Clinical Question: In well-trained male subjects, is there an association between RT frequency and the development of muscular strength and hypertrophy? Summary of Key Findings: Four studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. All studies showed that lower-frequency training could elicit muscular strength and hypertrophy increases. One study suggested that a higher frequency compared with a lower frequency may provide a slight benefit to hypertrophic development. One study reported a greater level of delayed onset muscle soreness with lower frequency training. The 4 studies demonstrate support for the clinical question. Clinical Bottom Line: Current evidence suggests that lower-frequency RT produces equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT when volume is equated. The evidence is particularly convincing when lower-frequency RT is associated with a total-body training protocol in well-trained male subjects. Strength of Recommendation: There is moderate-to-strong evidence to suggest that lower-frequency RT, when volume is equated, will produce equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT.

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances strength training volume but not the force-velocity profile

PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore the acute effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the force-velocity relationship, strength training volume, movement velocity, and ratings of perceived exertion.

METHODS

Fourteen healthy men (age 22.8 ± 3.0 years) were randomly stimulated over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex with either ANODAL, CATHODAL or SHAM tDCS for 15 min at 2 mA. The one-repetition maximum (1RM) and force-velocity relationship parameters were evaluated during the bench press exercise before and after receiving the tDCS. Subsequently, participants completed a resistance training session consisting of sets of five repetitions with 1 min of inter-set rest against the 75%1RM until failure.

RESULTS

No significant changes were observed in the 1RM or in the force-velocity relationship parameters (p ≥ 0.377). The number of repetitions was higher for the ANODAL compared to the CATHODAL (p = 0.025; ES = 0.37) and SHAM (p = 0.009; ES = 0.47) conditions. The reductions of movement velocity across sets were lower for the ANODAL than for the CATHODAL and SHAM condition (p = 0.014). RPE values were lower for the ANODAL compared to the CATHODAL (p = 0.119; ES = 0.33) and SHAM (p = 0.150; ES = 0.44) conditions. No significant differences between the CATHODAL and SHAM conditions were observed for any variable.

CONCLUSION

The application of ANODAL tDCS before a resistance training session increased training volume, enabled the maintenance of higher movement velocities, and reduced RPE values. These results suggest that tDCS could be an effective method to enhance resistance-training performance.

Progressive Resistance Training Volume: Effects on Muscle Thickness, Mass, and Strength Adaptations in Resistance-Trained Individuals

Aube, D, Wadhi, T, Rauch, J, Anand, A, Barakat, C, Pearson, J, Bradshaw, J, Zazzo, S, Ugrinowitsch, C, and De Souza, EO. Progressive resistance training volume: effects on muscle thickness, mass, and strength adaptations in resistance-trained individuals. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-This study investigated the effects of 12-SET, 18-SET, and 24-SET lower-body weekly sets on muscle strength and mass accretion. Thirty-five resistance-trained individuals (one repetition maximum [1RM] squat: body mass ratio [1RM: BM] = 2.09) were randomly divided into 12-SET: n = 13, 18-SET: n = 12, and 24-SET: n = 10. Subjects underwent an 8-week resistance-training (RT) program consisting of 2 weekly sessions. Muscle strength (1RM), repetitions to failure (RTF) at 70% of 1RM, anterior thigh muscle thickness (MT), at the medial MT (MMT) and distal MT (DMT) points, as well as the sum of both sites (ΣMT), along with region of interest for fat-free mass (ROI-FFM) were measured at baseline and post-testing. For the 1RM, there was a main time effect (p ≤ 0.0001). However, there was a strong trend toward significance (p = 0.052) for group-by-time interaction, suggesting that 18-SET increased 1RM back squat to a greater extent compared with 24-SET, (24-SET: 9.5 kg, 5.4%; 18-SET: 25.5 kg, 16.2%; 12-SET: 18.3 kg, 11.3%). For RTF, only a main time-effect (p ≤ 0.0003) was observed (24-set: 5.7 reps, 33.1%; 18-SET: 2.4 reps, 14.5%; 12-SET: 5.0 reps, 34.8%). For the MMT, DMT, ΣMT, and ROI-FFM, there was only main time-effect (p ≤ 0.0001), (MMT: 24-SET: 0.15 cm, 2.7%; 18-SET: 0.32 cm, 5.7%; 12-SET: 0.38 cm, 6.4%-DMT: 24-set: 0.39 cm, 13.1%; 18-SET: 0.28 cm, 8.9%; 12-SET: 0.34 cm, 9.7%-ΣMT: 24-set: 0.54 cm, 6.1%; 18-SET: 0.60 cm, 6.7%; 12-SET: 0.72 cm, 7.7%, and ROI-FFM: 24-set: 0.70 kg, 2.6%; 18-SET: 1.09 kg, 4.2%; 12-SET: 1.20 kg, 4.6%, respectively). Although all of the groups increased maximum strength, our results suggest that the middle dose range may optimize the gains in back squat 1RM. Our findings also support that differences in weekly set number did not impact in MT and ROI-FFM adaptations in subjects who can squat more than twice their body mass.