Effects of Resistance Training Performed to Failure or Not to Failure on Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Power Output: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

A Comparison of Subjective Estimations and Objective Velocities at Quantifying Proximity to Failure for the Bench Press in Resistance-Trained Men and Women

ABSTRACT

Hickmott, LM, Butcher, SJ, and Chilibeck, PD. A comparison of subjective estimations and objective velocities at quantifying proximity to failure for the bench press in resistance-trained men and women. J Strength Cond Res 38(7): 1206-1212, 2024-The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of quantifying repetitions in reserve (RIR) in the bench press among 18 men and 18 women between 2 conditions: (a) subjective estimations and (b) objective velocities. Subjects performed 4 sessions over 10 days: (a) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) test; (b) repetition-to-failure test at 80% of 1RM; (c) 3 sets to failure at 80% of 1RM; and (d) 3 sets to failure at 75, 80, and 85% of 1RM. During sessions 2, 3, and 4, subjects verbally stated their perceived 4 and 2 RIR intraset, whereas average concentric velocity was recorded on all repetitions. The dependent variable for the subjective estimations condition was the difference between the actual number of RIR and the subject's subjective estimated number of RIR at the verbally stated 4 and 2 RIR. The dependent variable for the objective velocities condition was the difference between the actual number of RIR and the number of RIR calculated from the subject's baseline individualized last repetition average concentric velocity-RIR profile. Significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Sessions 3 and 4 had significant ( p < 0.001) condition × set and condition × load interactions, respectively, at both 4 and 2 RIR. Objective velocities were significantly more accurate than subjective estimations on set 1 and set 2 at both RIRs during session 3 and for 75 and 80% of 1RM at both RIRs during session 4. Objective velocities exhibit significantly greater accuracy than subjective estimations at quantifying RIR during initial sets and lower loads.

Application of a New Monitoring Variable: Effects of Power Loss During Squat Training on Strength Gains and Sports Performance

ABSTRACT

Zhang, M, Chen, L, Dai, J, Yang, Q, Huang, Z, He, J, Ji, H, Sun, J, and Li, D. Application of a new monitoring variable: Effects of power loss during squat training on strength gains and sports performance. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 656-670, 2024-This study aimed to compare the effects of power loss (PL) autoregulated volume (PL10 and PL20) with standardized fixed-load (FL) prescription on strength, sports performance, and lean body mass (LBM). Thirty-five female basketball players from a sports college were randomly assigned to 3 experimental groups (PL10, n = 12; PL20, n = 12; and FL, n = 11, respectively) that performed a resistance training (RT) program with wave-like periodization for 10 weeks using the back squat exercise. Assessments performed before (Pre) and after (Post) intervention included assessed 1 repetition maximum (1RM), body composition, 20-m sprint (T20M), change of direction (COD), and jump performance, including countermovement jump with arm swing, maximum vertical jump, and reactive strength index. Three groups showed significant improvements in strength (effect size [ES]: PL10 = 2.98, PL20 = 3.14, and FL = 1.90; p < 0.001) and jump performance (ES: PL10 = 0.74, PL20 = 1.50, and FL = 0.50; p <0.05-0.001). However, PL10 and PL20 demonstrated different advantages in sports performance compared with FL (group × time interaction, p <0.05). Specifically, PL10 significantly improved COD performance (ES = -0.79 ∼ -0.53, p <0.01), whereas PL20 showed greater improvements in sprint (ES = -0.57, p <0.05) and jump performance (ES = 0.67-1.64, p <0.01-0.001). Moreover, PL10 resulted in similar gains to PL20 and beneficial improvements compared with FL in LBM, despite performing the least repetitions. Overall, the study indicates that power loss-based autoregulation induces greater gains in LBM and sports performance, as well as eliciting a higher efficiency dose response than standardized FL prescriptions, particularly for PL10. Therefore, incorporating PL monitoring in training programs is recommended, and further studies on power-based RT would be worthwhile.

The Importance of Recovery in Resistance Training Microcycle Construction

Systemic resistance training aims to enhance performance by balancing stress, fatigue and recovery. While fatigue is expected, insufficient recovery may temporarily impair performance. The aim of this review was to examine evidence regarding manipulation of resistance training variables on subsequent effects on recovery and performance. PubMed, Medline, SPORTDiscus, Scopus and CINAHL were searched. Only studies that investigated recovery between resistance training sessions were selected, with a total of 24 articles included for review. Training to failure may lengthen recovery times, potentially impairing performance; however, it may be suitable if implemented strategically ensuring adequate recovery between sessions of similar exercises or muscle groups. Higher volumes may increase recovery demands, especially when paired with training to failure, however, with wide variation in individual responses, it is suggested to start with lower volume, monitor recovery, and gradually increase training volume if appropriate. Exercises emphasising the lower body, multi-joint movements, greater muscle recruitment, eccentric contractions, and/or the lengthened position may require longer recovery times. Adjusting volume and frequency of these exercises can affect recovery demands depending on the goals and training logistics. Daily undulating programming may maximise performance on priority sessions while maintaining purposeful and productive easy days. For example, active recovery in the form of training opposing muscle groups, light aerobic cardio, or low-volume power-type training may improve recovery and potentially elicit a post activation potentiation priming effect compared to passive recovery. However, it is possible that training cessation may be adequate for allowing sufficient recovery prior to sessions of importance.

Acute Effects of Resistance Exercise on Intraocular Pressure in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Hackett, DA, Li, J, Wang, B, Way, KL, Cross, T, and Tran, DL. Acute effects of resistance exercise on intraocular pressure in healthy adults: A systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 38(2): 394-404, 2024-Intraocular pressure (IOP) tends to fluctuate during a resistance exercise (RE). This systematic review examines the acute effects of RE on IOP in healthy adults and factors that influence changes in IOP. Five electronic databases were searched using terms related to RE and IOP. A strict inclusion criterion was applied, which included being 55 years or younger with no medical conditions and RE intensity needing to be quantifiable (e.g., based on a maximal effort). Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Isometric and isotonic contractions produced similar changes in IOP during RE up to 28.7 mm Hg. Exercises that involved larger muscle mass, such as squats and leg press, were found to produce changes in IOP during exercise ranging from 3.1 to 28.7 mm Hg. Smaller changes in IOP during RE were found for exercises engaging less muscle mass (e.g., handgrip and bicep curls). Intraocular pressure was found to increase during RE when lifting heavier loads and with longer exercise durations (e.g., greater repetitions). The Valsalva maneuver (VM) and breath-hold during RE accentuated the change in IOP, with more extreme changes observed with the VM. However, most studies showed that postexercise IOP returned to baseline after approximately 1 minute of recovery. An acute increase in IOP is observed during RE in healthy adults with fluctuations of varying magnitude. Factors that independently increase IOP during RE include exercises involving larger muscle mass, heavy loads, greater set duration, and when the VM or breath-hold is performed.

Minimalist Training: Is Lower Dosage or Intensity Resistance Training Effective to Improve Physical Fitness? A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Findings from original research, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses have demonstrated the effectiveness of resistance training (RT) on markers of performance and health. However, the literature is inconsistent with regards to the dosage effects (frequency, intensity, time, type) of RT to maximize training-induced improvements. This is most likely due to moderating factors such as age, sex, and training status. Moreover, individuals with limited time to exercise or who lack motivation to perform RT are interested in the least amount of RT to improve physical fitness.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to investigate and identify lower than typically recommended RT dosages (i.e., shorter durations, lower volumes, and intensity activities) that can improve fitness components such as muscle strength and endurance for sedentary individuals or beginners not meeting the minimal recommendation of exercise.

METHODS

Due to the broad research question involving different RT types, cohorts, and outcome measures (i.e., high heterogeneity), a narrative review was selected instead of a systematic meta-analysis approach.

RESULTS

It seems that one weekly RT session is sufficient to induce strength gains in RT beginners with < 3 sets and loads below 50% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). With regards to the number of repetitions, the literature is controversial and some authors report that repetition to failure is key to achieve optimal adaptations, while other authors report similar adaptations with fewer repetitions. Additionally, higher intensity or heavier loads tend to provide superior results. With regards to the RT type, multi-joint exercises induce similar or even larger effects than single-joint exercises.

CONCLUSION

The least amount of RT that can be performed to improve physical fitness for beginners for at least the first 12 weeks is one weekly session at intensities below 50% 1RM, with < 3 sets per multi-joint exercise.

Similar muscle hypertrophy following eight weeks of resistance training to momentary muscular failure or with repetitions-in-reserve in resistance-trained individuals

This study examined the influence of resistance training (RT) proximity-to-failure, determined by repetitions-in-reserve (RIR), on quadriceps hypertrophy and neuromuscular fatigue. Resistance-trained males (n = 12) and females (n = 6) completed an 8-week intervention involving two RT sessions per week. Lower limbs were randomised to perform the leg press and leg extension exercises either to i) momentary muscular failure (FAIL), or ii) a perceived 2-RIR and 1-RIR, respectively (RIR). Muscle thickness of the quadriceps [rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis (VL)] and acute neuromuscular fatigue (i.e., repetition and lifting velocity loss) were assessed. Data was analysed with Bayesian linear mixed-effect models. Increases in quadriceps thickness (average of RF and VL) from pre- to post-intervention were similar for FAIL [0.181 cm (HDI: 0.119 to 0.243)] and RIR [0.182 cm (HDI: 0.115 to 0.247)]. Between-protocol differences in RF thickness slightly favoured RIR [-0.036 cm (HDI: -0.113 to 0.047)], but VL thickness slightly favoured FAIL [0.033 cm (HDI: -0.046 to 0.116)]. Mean volume was similar across the RT intervention between FAIL and RIR. Lifting velocity and repetition loss were consistently greater for FAIL versus RIR, with the magnitude of difference influenced by the exercise and the stage of the RT intervention.

Preferred Reporting Items for Resistance Exercise Studies (PRIRES): A Checklist Developed Using an Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

The issues of replication and scientific transparency have been raised in exercise and sports science research. A potential means to address the replication crisis and enhance research reliability is to improve reporting quality and transparency. This study aims to formulate a reporting checklist as a supplement to the existing reporting guidelines, specifically for resistance exercise studies.

METHODS

PubMed (which covers Medline) and Scopus (which covers Medline, EMBASE, Ei Compendex, World Textile Index, Fluidex, Geobase, Biobase, and most journals in Web of Science) were searched for systematic reviews that comprised the primary studies directly comparing different resistance training methods. Basic data on the selected reviews, including on authors, publication years, and objectives, were summarized. The reporting items for the checklist were identified based on the objective of the reviews. Additional items from an existing checklist, namely the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template, a National Strength and Conditioning Association handbook, and an article from the EQUATOR library were incorporated into the final reporting checklist.

RESULTS

Our database search retrieved 3595 relevant records. After automatic duplicate removal, the titles and abstracts of the remaining 2254 records were screened. The full texts of 137 records were then reviewed, and 88 systematic reviews that met the criteria were included in the umbrella review.

CONCLUSION

Developed primarily by an umbrella review method, this checklist covers the research questions which have been systematically studied and is expected to improve the reporting completeness of future resistance exercise studies. The PRIRES checklist comprises 26 reporting items (39 subitems) that cover four major topics in resistance exercise intervention: 1) exercise selection, performance, and training parameters, 2) training program and progression, 3) exercise setting, and 4) planned vs actual training. The PRIRES checklist was designed specifically for reporting resistance exercise intervention. It is expected to be used with other reporting guidelines such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials. This article presents only the development process and resulting items of the checklist. An accompanying article detailing the rationale for, the importance of, and examples of each item is being prepared.

REGISTRATION

This study is registered with the EQUATOR Network under the title "Preferred Reporting Items for Resistance Exercise Studies (PRIRES)." PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235259.

Fast and Medium Tempo Resistance Training with a Low Number of Repetitions in Trained Men: Effects on Maximal Strength and Power Output

This study aimed to investigate the effects of high load fast and medium tempo back squats using a low number of repetitions on maximal strength and power output. Seventeen participants completed a countermovement jump test and 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) assessment before and after an eight-week intervention. All participants were randomly divided into a fast tempo (FAS: 1/0/1/0) and a medium tempo (MED: 2/0/2/0) resistance training (RT) group and performed three repetitions per set of a Smith back squat exercise with 85% 1-RM intensity. Maximal strength, jump height, peak power and force of the two groups were significantly improved (p < 0.05). In addition, peak velocity significantly increased after the intervention in the FAS group (p < 0.05), but not in the MED group (p > 0.05). A significant interaction effect between training groups was observed for jump height (F (_{1, 30}) = 5.49, p = 0.026, η² = 0.155). However, no significant group by time interaction effects were found between training groups for maximal strength (F (_{1, 30}) = 0.11, p = 0.742, η² = 0.004). Therefore, the two groups showed similar effects in maximal strength, but, compared with the MED group, FAS resistance training with low repetitions caused favorable adaptations in power output in trained men.

Influence of Resistance Training Proximity-to-Failure on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the influence of resistance training proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy.

METHODS

Literature searches in the PubMed, SCOPUS and SPORTDiscus databases identified a total of 15 studies that measured muscle hypertrophy (in healthy adults of any age and resistance training experience) and compared resistance training performed to: (A) momentary muscular failure versus non-failure; (B) set failure (defined as anything other than momentary muscular failure) versus non-failure; or (C) different velocity loss thresholds.

RESULTS

There was a trivial advantage for resistance training performed to set failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy in studies applying any definition of set failure [effect size=0.19 (95% confidence interval 0.00, 0.37), p=0.045], with no moderating effect of volume load (p=0.884) or relative load (p=0.525). Given the variability in set failure definitions applied across studies, sub-group analyses were conducted and found no advantage for either resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy [effect size=0.12 (95% confidence interval -0.13, 0.37), p=0.343], or for resistance training performed to high (>25%) versus moderate (20-25%) velocity loss thresholds [effect size=0.08 (95% confidence interval -0.16, 0.32), p=0.529].

CONCLUSION

Overall, our main findings suggest that (i) there is no evidence to support that resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure is superior to non-failure resistance training for muscle hypertrophy and (ii) higher velocity loss thresholds, and theoretically closer proximities-to-failure do not always elicit greater muscle hypertrophy. As such, these results provide evidence for a potential non-linear relationship between proximity-to-failure and muscle hypertrophy.

Effects of Exercise Frequency with Complex Contrast Training on Measures of Physical Fitness in Active Adult Males

Complex contrast training (CCT) is an exercise modality that utilizes both high-load resistance activity and low-load plyometric activity in a set-by-set fashion within a single exercise session. Such a combination of exercises targets multiple aspects of the force−velocity curve and may thus lead to improvement of various components of physical fitness. However, no previous study has attempted to compare the effects of load-equated two vs. three CCT sessions per week on measures of physical fitness. Forty-five male participants aged 21.4 ± 2.0 years were randomly assigned to either two weekly CCT sessions (CCT-2; n = 15), three weekly CCT sessions (CCT-3; n = 15), or an active control group (CG; n = 15). Selected measures of physical fitness were assessed pre- and post-six weeks of training. The tests included the assessment of 15 and 30 m linear sprint speeds, upper (medicine ball throw) and lower limb muscle power (standing long jump and countermovement jump with arm thrust), muscle strength (isokinetic peak knee extensor/flexor torque), and change-of-direction speed (modified agility T-test (MAT)). Significant group−time interactions were observed for all dependent variables (all p < 0.001, ɳp2 = 0.51−0.78) using ANOVA. Post hoc tests indicated significant performance improvements for the CCT-2 and CCT3 groups for all dependent variables (Hedge’s g = 0.28−3.26, %Δ = 2.4−16.7), including the 15 and 30 m linear sprint speeds (p < 0.001), medicine ball throw (p < 0.001), standing long jump (p < 0.001), countermovement jump with arm thrust (p < 0.001), right leg knee extensor (p < 0.001) and flexor peak torque (p < 0.001), left leg knee extensor (p < 0.001) and flexor peak torque (p < 0.001), and change-of-direction speed (p < 0.001). The CCT-3 group showed greater improvements in MAT compared to the CCT-2 group (g = 3.26 vs. 0.70, p < 0.001). In conclusion, compared to active controls, the load-equated CCT-2 and CCT-3 programs provided similar effects on measures of physical fitness in active adult males. However, an athlete’s goal is to improve their MAT score, the CCT-3 program may elicit greater improvements compared with the CCT-2 program.

Personalizing Resistance Training Mitigates Neuromuscular and Perceived Fatigue: The Autoregulation Cluster Training Method

PURPOSE

To compare predetermined and autoregulated resistance training sessions on velocity loss and perceived fatigue.

METHODS

Twenty-six resistance-trained men completed 3 sessions including the back-squat and bench-press exercises matched for load (75% of 1-repetition maximum), volume (24 repetitions), and total rest (240 s). Sessions were randomly performed as traditional set (TRA), 3 sets of 8 repetitions with 120-second interset rests; cluster interset-rest redistribution (IRR), 6 clusters of 4 repetitions with 48-second between-clusters rests; and autoregulation cluster training (ACT), a personalized combination of clusters, repetitions per cluster, and between-clusters rest regulated on a velocity loss threshold. The comparative effects were evaluated on velocity loss outputs measured with a linear encoder and perceived fatigue responses reported using a single-item scale.

RESULTS

IRR and ACT induced less velocity loss than TRA (b = -2.09, P < .001). ACT also mitigated velocity loss more than IRR (b = -2.31, P < .001). The back squat resulted in greater velocity loss compared to the bench press (b = 1.83, P < .001). Perceived fatigue responses mirrored the pattern observed for the velocity loss outputs (IRR and ACT vs TRA: b = -0.64, P < .001; ACT vs IRR: b = -1.05, P < .001; back squat vs bench press: b = 0.46, P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

IRR and ACT reduced neuromuscular and perceived fatigue, likely due to their cluster-set structures' embedding frequent windows of interset rest. However, the ACT was overall more effective, presumably given its personalized structure.

Appropriate Reporting of Exercise Variables in Resistance Training Protocols: Much more than Load and Number of Repetitions

Manipulating resistance training variables is crucial to plan the induced stimuli correctly. When reporting the exercise variables in resistance training protocols, sports scientists and practitioners often refer to the load lifted and the total number of repetitions. The present conceptual review explores all within-exercise variables that may influence the strength and hypertrophic gains, and the changes in muscle architecture. Together with the (1) load and (2) the number of repetitions, (3) performing repetitions to failure or not to failure, (4) the displacement of the load or the range of movement (full or partial), (5) the portion of the partial movement to identify the muscle length at which the exercise is performed, (6) the total time under tension, the duration of each phase and the position of the two isometric phases, (7) whether the concentric, eccentric or concentric-eccentric phase is performed, (8) the use of internal or external focus and (9) the inter-set rest may all have repercussions on the adaptations induced by each resistance exercise. Manipulating one or more variable allows to increase, equalize or decrease the stimuli related to each exercise. Sports scientists and practitioners are invited to list all aforementioned variables for each exercise when reporting resistance training protocols.

Effects of a Multicomponent Exercise Program on Improving Frailty in Post-COVID-19 Older Adults after Intensive Care Units: A Single-Group Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Older adult patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome present greater physical impairment accompanied by frailty than younger patients, which is why multicomponent exercise programs (MEP) are recommended for their positive effects on improving frailty and physical capacity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a short MEP (Vivifrail; <4 weeks) on improving frailty in post-COVID-19 older adults after intensive care units. Methods: To develop a retrospective cohort study, data were collected from the functional gait training program based on selected Vivifrail MEP in a single-group and applied to patients admitted with a diagnosis of post-COVID-19 functional impairment. The MEP was carried out for 3 weeks, with daily sessions lasting 40 min. Patients included were assessed at the beginning and at the end of the protocol by using the Short Performance Physical Battery (SPPB), the number of falls in the last year, the number of falls with medical attention, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, the presence of dementia, the Trunk Control Test (TCT), the Tinetti balance and gait test, Barthel Index, Medical Research Council Sum Score (MRCSS) and handgrip strength dynamometry. Results: The results of this study show statistically significant improvements in physical fitness and frailty with increases in the Short Physical Performance Battery (Z = 9.12, p < 0.001) by means of the MET applied in its short version (<4 weeks) showing even clinically relevant improvements (>2.5 points). Statistically significant improvements were also found in Medical Research Council Sum Score (Z = 12.345, p < 0.001), Barthel Index Score (Z = 12.272, p < 0.001), Trunk Control Test (Z = 12. 36, p < 0.001), Tinetti−POMA (Z = 12.293, p < 0.001) including the balance (Z = 12.11, p < 0.001), gait (Z = 12.164, p < 0.001) subscales and in the hand dynamometry (Z = 12.172, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The selected Vivifrail MEP is effective and safe for improving frailty in post-COVID-19 older adult’s patients.

Towards an improved understanding of proximity-to-failure in resistance training and its influence on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, neuromuscular fatigue, muscle damage, and perceived discomfort: A scoping review

While proximity-to-failure is considered an important resistance training (RT) prescription variable, its influence on physiological adaptations and short-term responses to RT is uncertain. Given the ambiguity in the literature, a scoping review was undertaken to summarise evidence for the influence of proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy, neuromuscular fatigue, muscle damage and perceived discomfort. Literature searching was performed according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines and identified three themes of studies comparing either: i) RT performed to momentary muscular failure versus non-failure, ii) RT performed to set failure (defined as anything other than momentary muscular failure) versus non-failure, and iii) RT performed to different velocity loss thresholds. The findings highlight that no consensus definition for "failure" exists in the literature, and the proximity-to-failure achieved in "non-failure" conditions is often ambiguous and variable across studies. This poses challenges when deriving practical recommendations for manipulating proximity-to-failure in RT to achieve desired outcomes. Based on the limited available evidence, RT to set failure is likely not superior to non-failure RT for inducing muscle hypertrophy, but may exacerbate neuromuscular fatigue, muscle damage, and post-set perceived discomfort versus non-failure RT. Together, these factors may impair post-exercise recovery and subsequent performance, and may also negatively influence long-term adherence to RT.KEY POINTS This scoping review identified three broad themes of studies investigating proximity-to-failure in RT, based on the specific definition of set failure used (and therefore the research question being examined), to improve the validity of study comparisons and interpretations.There is no consensus definition for set failure in RT, and the proximity-to-failure achieved during non-failure RT is often unclear and varies both within and between studies, which together poses challenges when interpreting study findings and deriving practical recommendations regarding the influence of RT proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy and other short-term responses.Based on the limited available evidence, performing RT to set failure is likely not superior to non-failure RT to maximise muscle hypertrophy, but the optimal proximity to failure in RT for muscle hypertrophy is unclear and may be moderated by other RT variables (e.g., load, volume-load). Also, RT performed to set failure likely induces greater neuromuscular fatigue, muscle damage, and perceived discomfort than non-failure RT, which may negatively influence RT performance, post-RT recovery, and long-term adherence.

Effects of Velocity Loss Threshold during Resistance Training on Strength and Athletic Adaptations: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

This study aimed to systematically review the effects of the different velocity loss (VL) thresholds during resistance training (RT) on strength and athletic adaptations. The VL was analyzed as both a categorical and continuous variable. For the categorical analysis, individual VL thresholds were divided into Low-ModVL (≤ 25% VL) or Mod-HighVL (> 25% VL). The efficacy of these VL thresholds was examined using between-group (Low-ModVL vs. Mod-HighVL) and within-group (pre–post effects in each group) analyses. For the continuous analysis, the relationship (R2) between each individual VL threshold and its respective effect size (ES) in each outcome was examined. Ten studies (308 resistance-trained young men) were finally included. The Low-ModVL group trained using a significantly (p ≤ 0.001) lower VL (16.1 ± 6.2 vs. 39.8 ± 9.0%) and volume (212.0 ± 102.3 vs. 384.0 ± 95.0 repetitions) compared with Mod-HighVL. Between-group analyses yielded higher efficacy of Low-ModVL over Mod-HighVL to increase performance against low (ES = 0.31, p = 0.01) and moderate/high loads (ES = 0.21, p = 0.07). Within-group analyses revealed superior effects after training using Low-ModVL thresholds in all strength (Low-ModVL, ES = 0.79–2.39 vs. Mod-HighVL, ES = 0.59–1.91) and athletic (Low-ModVL, ES = 0.35–0.59 vs. Mod-HighVL, ES = 0.05–0.36) parameters. Relationship analyses showed that the adaptations produced decreased as the VL threshold increased, especially for the low loads (R2 = 0.73, p = 0.01), local endurance (R2 = 0.93, p = 0.04), and sprint ability (R2 = 0.61, p = 0.06). These findings prove that low–moderate levels of intra-set fatigue (≤25% VL) are more effective and efficient stimuli than moderate–high levels (> 25% VL) to promote strength and athletic adaptations.

Methods for Controlling and Reporting Resistance Training Proximity to Failure: Current Issues and Future Directions

Resistance training variables such as volume, load, and frequency are well defined. However, the variable proximity to failure does not have a consistent quantification method, despite being defined as the number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) upon completion of a resistance training set. Further, there is between-study variability in the definition of failure itself. Studies have defined failure as momentary (inability to complete the concentric phase despite maximal effort), volitional (self-termination), or have provided no working definition. Methods to quantify proximity to failure include percentage-based prescription, repetition maximum zone training, velocity loss, and self-reported RIR; each with positives and negatives. Specifically, applying percentage-based prescriptions across a group may lead to a wide range of per-set RIR owing to interindividual differences in repetitions performed at specific percentages of 1 repetition maximum. Velocity loss is an objective method; however, the relationship between velocity loss and RIR varies set-to-set, across loading ranges, and between exercises. Self-reported RIR is inherently individualized; however, its subjectivity can lead to inaccuracy. Further, many studies, regardless of quantification method, do not report RIR. Consequently, it is difficult to make specific recommendations for per-set proximity to failure to maximize hypertrophy and strength. Therefore, this review aims to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the current proximity to failure quantification methods. Further, we propose future directions for researchers and practitioners to quantify proximity to failure, including implementation of absolute velocity stops using individual average concentric velocity/RIR relationships. Finally, we provide guidance for reporting self-reported RIR regardless of the quantification method.

Exercise duration: Independent effects on acute physiologic responses and the need for an individualized prescription

An individualization of exercise prescription is implemented mainly in terms of intensity but not for duration. To survey the need for an individualized exercise duration prescription, we investigated acute physiologic responses during constant‐load exercise of maximal duration (t_max) and determined so‐called duration thresholds. Differences between absolute (min) and relative terms (% t_max) of exercise duration were analyzed. Healthy young and trained male and female participants (n = 11) performed an incremental exercise test and one t_max constant‐load exercise test at a target intensity of 10% of maximal power output below the second lactate turn point (LTP₂). Blood lactate, heart rate, and spirometric data were measured during all tests. t_max was markedly different across subjects (69.6 ± 14.8 min; range: 40–90 min). However, distinct duration phases separated by duration thresholds (DTh) were found in most measured variables. These duration thresholds (except DTh1) were significantly related to t_max (DTh2: r² = 0.90, p < 0.0001; DTh3: r² = 0.98, p < 0.0001) and showed substantial interindividual differences if expressed in absolute terms (DTh2: 24.8 ± 6.0 min; DTh3: 47.4 ± 10.6 min) but not in relative terms (DTh2: 35.4 ± 2.7% t_max; DTh3: 67.9 ± 2.4% t_max). Our data showed that (1) maximal duration was individually different despite the same relative intensity, (2) duration thresholds that were related to t_max could be determined in most measured variables, and (3) duration thresholds were comparable between subjects if expressed in relative terms. We therefore conclude that duration needs to be concerned as an independent variable of exercise prescription.

The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Autoregulation has emerged as a potentially beneficial resistance training paradigm to individualize and optimize programming; however, compared to standardized prescription, the effects of autoregulated load and volume prescription on muscular strength and hypertrophy adaptations are unclear. Our objective was to compare the effect of autoregulated load prescription (repetitions in reserve-based rating of perceived exertion and velocity-based training) to standardized load prescription (percentage-based training) on chronic one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength and cross-sectional area (CSA) hypertrophy adaptations in resistance-trained individuals. We also aimed to investigate the effect of volume autoregulation with velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% compared to > 25% on 1RM strength and CSA hypertrophy.

Methods

This review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus was conducted. Mean differences (MD), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. Sub-analyses were performed as applicable.

Results

Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis: six studies on load autoregulation and nine studies on volume autoregulation. No significant differences between autoregulated and standardized load prescription were demonstrated for 1RM strength (MD = 2.07, 95% CI – 0.32 to 4.46 kg, p = 0.09, SMD = 0.21). Velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% demonstrated significantly greater 1RM strength (MD = 2.32, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.31 kg, p = 0.02, SMD = 0.23) and significantly lower CSA hypertrophy (MD = 0.61, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.16 cm², p = 0.03, SMD = 0.28) than velocity loss thresholds > 25%. No significant differences between velocity loss thresholds > 25% and 20–25% were demonstrated for hypertrophy (MD = 0.36, 95% CI – 0.29 to 1.00 cm², p = 0.28, SMD = 0.13); however, velocity loss thresholds > 25% demonstrated significantly greater hypertrophy compared to thresholds ≤ 20% (MD = 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.20 cm², p = 0.03, SMD = 0.34).

Conclusions

Collectively, autoregulated and standardized load prescription produced similar improvements in strength. When sets and relative intensity were equated, velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% were superior for promoting strength possibly by minimizing acute neuromuscular fatigue while maximizing chronic neuromuscular adaptations, whereas velocity loss thresholds > 20–25% were superior for promoting hypertrophy by accumulating greater relative volume.

Protocol Registration The original protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42021240506) with the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-021-00404-9.

Velocity-Based Resistance Training on 1-RM, Jump and Sprint Performance: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

Weight resistance training (RT) has been shown to positively influence physical performance. Within the last two decades, a methodology based on monitoring RT through movement velocity (also called velocity-based resistance training, VBRT) has emerged. The aim of this PRISMA-based systematic review was to evaluate the effect of VBRT programs on variables related to muscle strength (one-repetition maximum, 1-RM), and high-speed actions (vertical jump, and sprint performance) in trained subjects. The search for published articles was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, SPORT Discus/EBSCO, OVID, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases using Boolean algorithms independently. A total of 22 studies met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review (a low-to-moderate overall risk of bias of the analyzed studies was detected). VBRT is an effective method to improve 1-RM, vertical jump and sprint. According to the results of the analyzed studies, it is not necessary to reach high muscle failure in order to achieve the best training results. These findings reinforce the fact that it is possible to optimize exercise adaptations with less fatigue. Future studies should corroborate these findings in female population.

Effects of Resistance Training to Muscle Failure on Acute Fatigue: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Proper design of resistance training (RT) variables is a key factor to reach the maximum potential of neuromuscular adaptations. Among those variables, the use of RT performed to failure (RTF) may lead to a different magnitude of acute fatigue compared with RT not performed to failure (RTNF). The fatigue response could interfere with acute adaptive changes, in turn regulating long-term adaptations. Considering that the level of fatigue affects long-term adaptations, it is important to determine how fatigue is affected by RTF versus RTNF.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effects of RTF versus RTNF on acute fatigue.

METHODS

The search was conducted in January 2021 in seven databases. Only studies with a crossover design that investigated the acute biomechanical properties (vertical jump height, velocity of movement, power output, or isometric strength), metabolic response (lactate or ammonia concentration), muscle damage (creatine kinase activity), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were selected. The data (mean ± standard deviation and sample size) were extracted from the included studies and were either converted into the standardized mean difference (SMD) or maintained in the raw mean difference (RMD) when the studies reported the results in the same scale. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included in the systematic review and 12 were included in the meta-analysis. The main meta-analyses indicated greater decrease of biomechanical properties for RTF compared with RTNF (SMD - 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.43 to - 0.49, p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a larger increase in metabolic response (RMD 4.48 mmol·L^-1, 95% CI 3.19-5.78, p < 0.001), muscle damage (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.31-1.21, p = 0.001), and RPE (SMD 1.93, 95% CI 0.87-3.00, p < 0.001) for RTF compared with RTNF. Further exploratory subgroup analyses showed that training status (p = 0.92), timepoint (p = 0.89), load (p = 0.10), and volume (p = 0.12) did not affect biomechanical properties; however, greater loss in the movement velocity test occurred on upper limbs compared with lower limbs (p < 0.001). Blood ammonia concentration was greater after RTF than RTNF (RMD 44.66 μmol·L^-1, 95% CI 32.27-57.05, p < 0.001), as was 48 h post-exercise blood creatine kinase activity (SMD 0.86, 95% CI 0.33-1.42, p = 0.002). Furthermore, although there was considerable heterogeneity in the overall analysis (I² = 83.72%; p < 0.01), a significant difference in RPE after RTF compared with RTNF was only found for studies that did not equalize training volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, RTF compared with RTNF led to a greater decrease in biomechanical properties and a simultaneous increase in metabolic response, higher muscle damage, and RPE. The exploratory analyses suggested a greater impairment in the velocity of movement test for the upper limbs, more pronounced muscle damage 48 h post-exercise, and a greater RPE in studies with non-equalized volume after the RTF session compared with RTNF. Therefore, it can be concluded that RTF leads to greater acute fatigue compared with RTNF. The higher acute fatigue after RTF can also have an important impact on chronic adaptive processes following RT; however, the greater acute fatigue following RTF can extend the time needed for recovery, which should be considered when RTF is used.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The original protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42020192336) in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

Accuracy in Predicting Repetitions to Task Failure in Resistance Exercise: A Scoping Review and Exploratory Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescribing repetitions relative to task failure is an emerging approach to resistance training. Under this approach, participants terminate the set based on their prediction of the remaining repetitions left to task failure. While this approach holds promise, an important step in its development is to determine how accurate participants are in their predictions. That is, what is the difference between the predicted and actual number of repetitions remaining to task failure, which ideally should be as small as possible.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy in predicting repetitions to task failure in resistance exercises.

DESIGN

Scoping review and exploratory meta-analysis.

SEARCH AND INCLUSION

A systematic literature search was conducted in January 2021 using the PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar databases. Inclusion criteria included studies with healthy participants who predicted the number of repetitions they can complete to task failure in various resistance exercises, before or during an ongoing set, which was performed to task failure. Sixteen publications were eligible for inclusion, of which 13 publications covering 12 studies, with a total of 414 participants, were included in our meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The main multilevel meta-analysis model including all effects sizes (262 across 12 clusters) revealed that participants tended to underpredict the number of repetitions to task failure by 0.95 repetitions (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-1.73), but with considerable heterogeneity (Q₍₂₆₁₎ = 3060, p < 0.0001, I² = 97.9%). Meta-regressions showed that prediction accuracy slightly improved when the predictions were made closer to set failure (β =  - 0.025, 95% CI - 0.05 to 0.0014) and when the number of repetitions performed to task failure was lower (≤ 12 repetitions: β = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04-0.09; > 12 repetitions: β = 0.47, 95% CI 0.44-0.49). Set number trivially influenced prediction accuracy with slightly increased accuracy in later sets (β =  - 0.07 repetitions, 95% CI - 0.14 to - 0.005). In contrast, participants' training status did not seem to influence prediction accuracy (β =  - 0.006 repetitions, 95% CI - 0.02 to 0.007) and neither did the implementation of upper or lower body exercises (upper body - lower body =  - 0.58 repetitions; 95% CI - 2.32 to 1.16). Furthermore, there was minimal between-participant variation in predictive accuracy (standard deviation 1.45 repetitions, 95% CI 0.99-2.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants were imperfect in their ability to predict proximity to task failure independent of their training background. It remains to be determined whether the observed degree of inaccuracy should be considered acceptable. Despite this, prediction accuracies can be improved if they are provided closer to task failure, when using heavier loads, or in later sets. To reduce the heterogeneity between studies, future studies should include a clear and detailed account of how task failure was explained to participants and how it was confirmed.

Post-COVID-19 Syndrome and the Potential Benefits of Exercise

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, is leading to unknown and unusual health conditions that are challenging to manage. Post-COVID-19 syndrome is one of those challenges, having become increasingly common as the pandemic evolves. The latest estimates suggest that 10 to 20% of the SARS-CoV-2 patients who undergo an acute symptomatic phase are experiencing effects of the disease beyond 12 weeks after diagnosis. Although research is beginning to examine this new condition, there are still serious concerns about the diagnostic identification, which limits the best therapeutic approach. Exercise programs and physical activity levels are well-known modulators of the clinical manifestations and prognosis in many chronic diseases. This narrative review summarizes the up-to-date evidence on post-COVID-19 syndrome to contribute to a better knowledge of the disease and explains how regular exercise may improve many of these symptoms and could reduce the long-term effects of COVID-19.

A Low-Protein High-Fat Diet Leads to Loss of Body Weight and White Adipose Tissue Weight via Enhancing Energy Expenditure in Mice

Obesity has become a worldwide health problem over the past three decades. During obesity, metabolic dysfunction of white adipose tissue (WAT) is a key factor increasing the risk of type 2 diabetes. A variety of diet approaches have been proposed for the prevention and treatment of obesity. The low-protein high-fat diet (LPHF) is a special kind of high-fat diet, characterized by the intake of a low amount of protein, while compared to typical high-fat diet, may induce weight loss and browning of WAT. Physical activity is another effective intervention to treat obesity by reducing WAT mass, inducing browning of WAT. In order to determine whether an LPHF, along with exercise enhanced body weight loss and body fat loss as well as the synergistic effect of an LPHF and exercise on energy expenditure in a mice model, we combined a 10-week LPHF with an 8-week forced treadmill training. Meanwhile, a traditional high-fat diet (HPHF) containing the same fat and relatively more protein was introduced as a comparison. In the current study, we further analyzed energy metabolism-related gene expression, plasma biomarkers, and related physiological changes. When comparing to HPHF, which induced a dramatic increase in body weight and WAT weight, the LPHF led to considerable loss of body weight and WAT, without muscle mass and strength decline, while it exhibited a risk of liver and pancreas damage. The mechanism underlying the LPHF-induced loss of body weight and WAT may be attributed to the synergistically upregulated expression of Ucp1 in WAT and Fgf21 in the liver, which may enhance energy expenditure. The 8-week training did not further enhance weight loss and increased plasma biomarkers of muscle damage when combined with LPHF. Furthermore, LPHF reduced the expression of fatty acid oxidation-related genes in adipose tissues, muscle tissues, and liver. Our results indicated that an LPHF has potential for obesity treatment, while the physiological condition should be monitored during application.