Unilateral high-load resistance training influences strength changes in the contralateral arm undergoing low-load training

被引:4
|
作者
Bell, Zachary W. [1 ]
Wong, Vickie [2 ]
Spitz, Robert W. [2 ]
Yamada, Yujiro [2 ]
Song, Jun Seob [2 ]
Kataoka, Ryo [2 ]
Chatakondi, Raksha N. [2 ]
Abe, Takashi [3 ,4 ]
Loenneke, Jeremy P. [2 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Dept Kinesiol & Phys Educ, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] Univ Mississippi, Kevser Ermin Appl Physiol Lab, Dept Hlth Exercise Sci & Recreat Management, University, MS 38677 USA
[3] Juntendo Univ, Grad Sch Hlth & Sports Sci, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan
[4] Juntendo Univ, Inst Hlth & Sports Sci & Med, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan
关键词
Cross-education; Muscle strength; Muscle hypertrophy; Within-subject model; MUSCLE; HYPERTROPHY; THICKNESS; INCREASES;
D O I
10.1016/j.jsams.2023.06.011
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Objectives: Within-subject training models have become common within the exercise literature. However, it is currently unknown if training one arm with a high load would impact muscle size and strength of the opposing arm training with a low load. Design: Parallel group. Methods: 116 participants were randomized to one of three groups that completed 6-weeks (18 sessions) of elbow flexion exercise. Group 1 trained their dominant arm only, beginning with a one-repetition maximum test (& LE;5 attempts), followed by four sets of exercise using a weight equivalent to 8-12 repetition maximum. Group 2 completed the same training as Group 1 in their dominant arm, while the non-dominant arm completed four sets of low-load exercise (30-40 repetition maximum). Group 3 trained their non-dominant arm only, per-forming the same low-load exercise as Group 2. Participants were compared for changes in muscle thickness and elbow flexion one-repetition maximum. Results: The greatest changes in non-dominant strength were present in Groups 1 (& UDelta; 1.5 kg; untrained arm) and 2 (& UDelta;1.1 kg; low-load arm with high load on opposite arm), compared to Group 3 (& UDelta; 0.3 kg; low-load only). Only the arms being directly trained observed changes in muscle thickness (& AP;& UDelta; 0.25 cm depending on site). Conclusions: Within-subject training models are potentially problematic when investigating changes in strength (though not muscle growth). This is based on the finding that the untrained limb of Group 1 saw similar changes in strength as the non-dominant limb of Group 2 which were both greater than the low-load training limb of Group 3. & COPY; 2023 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:440 / 445
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Unilateral High-load Resistance Training Influences Strength Changes In The Contralateral Arm Undergoing Lowload Training
    Loenneke, Jeremy P.
    Bell, Zachary W.
    Wong, Vickie
    Spitz, Robert W.
    Yamada, Yujiro
    Song, Jun Seob
    Kataoka, Ryo
    Abe, Takashi
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2023, 55 (09) : 681 - 681
  • [2] Unilateral High-load Training Does Not Augment Strength In The Contralateral Arm Undergoing The Same Training
    Song, Jun Seob
    Yamada, Yujiro
    Kataoka, Ryo
    Hammert, William
    Kang, Anna
    Spitz, Robert
    Wong, Vickie
    Seffrin, Aldo
    Kassiano, Witalo
    Loenneke, Jeremy P.
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2024, 56 (10) : 424 - 424
  • [3] Low-load resistance training with low relative pressure produces muscular changes similar to high-load resistance training
    Kim, Daeyeol
    Loenneke, Jeremy P.
    Ye, Xin
    Bemben, Debra A.
    Beck, Travis W.
    Larson, Rebecca D.
    Bemben, Michael G.
    MUSCLE & NERVE, 2017, 56 (06) : E126 - E133
  • [4] Effects Of High-load Versus Low-load Blood Flow Restricted Resistance Training On Strength And Hypertrophy
    Cook, Summer B.
    LaBarbera, Katherine E.
    Murphy, Bethany G.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2012, 44 : 199 - 199
  • [5] Superiority of High-Load vs. Low-Load Resistance Training in Military Cadets
    Ofsteng, Sjur F.
    Hammarstroem, Daniel
    Knox, Silje
    Josok, Oyvind
    Helkala, Kirsi
    Koll, Lise
    Hanestadhaugen, Marita
    Raastad, Truls
    Ronnestad, Bent R.
    Ellefsen, Stian
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2024, 38 (09) : 1584 - 1595
  • [6] Muscle Failure Promotes Greater Muscle Hypertrophy in Low-Load but Not in High-Load Resistance Training
    Lasevicius, Thiago
    Schoenfeld, Brad J.
    Silva-Batista, Carla
    Barros, Talita de Souza
    Aihara, Andre Yui
    Brendon, Helderson
    Longo, Ariel Roberth
    Tricoli, Valmor
    Peres, Bergson de Almeida
    Teixeira, Emerson Luiz
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2022, 36 (02) : 346 - 351
  • [7] Comparison of Metabolic, Ionic, and Electrolyte Responses to Exhaustive Low-Load Strength Training With and Without Blood Flow Restriction and High-Load Resistance Training
    Franz, Alexander
    Ji, Sanghyeon
    Luckmann, Stefan
    Boemer, Tobias
    Froeschen, Frank
    Wahl, Patrick
    Behringer, Michael
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS, 2024, 34 (09)
  • [8] Low-load strength resistance training with blood flow restriction compared with high-load strength resistance training on performance of professional soccer players: a randomized controlled trial
    Castilla-Lopez, Christian
    Romero-Franco, Natalia
    JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS, 2023, 63 (11): : 1146 - 1154
  • [9] Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction and High-Load Resistance Training Induce Comparable Changes in Patellar Tendon Properties
    Centner, Christoph
    Jerger, Simon
    Lauber, Benedikt
    Seynnes, Olivier
    Friedrich, Till
    Lolli, David
    Gollhofer, Albert
    Koenig, Daniel
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2022, 54 (04) : 582 - 589
  • [10] Greater postexercise hypotension response in low-load and high-volume resistance training versus high-load and low-volume resistance training
    Malheiros, Raphael
    Nasser, Igor
    Willardson, Jeffrey M.
    Miranda, Humberto
    SPORT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH, 2020, 16 (03) : 393 - 400