| Autor: |
Refalo MC; Centre for Sport Research (CSR), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia., Hamilton DL; Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia., Paval DR; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK., Gallagher IJ; Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK., Feros SA; Centre for Sport Research (CSR), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia., Fyfe JJ; Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. |
| Abstrakt: |
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. |
