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
  • [21] Low-load blood flow restriction training induces similar morphological and mechanical Achilles tendon adaptations compared with high-load resistance training
    Centner, Christoph
    Lauber, Benedikt
    Seynnes, Olivier R.
    Jerger, Simon
    Sohnius, Tim
    Gollhofer, Albert
    Koenig, Daniel
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY, 2019, 127 (06) : 1660 - 1667
  • [22] Ischemic strength training: a low-load alternative to heavy resistance exercise?
    Wernbom, M.
    Augustsson, J.
    Raastad, T.
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS, 2008, 18 (04) : 401 - 416
  • [23] Muscle Growth Adaptations To High-load And Low-load Training With Blood Flow Restriction In Calf Muscles
    Hammert, William B.
    Kataoka, Ryo
    Vasenina, Ecaterina
    Ibrahim, Adam H.
    Buckner, Samuel L.
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2022, 54 (09) : 385 - 385
  • [24] Magnitude of Muscle Strength and Mass Adaptations Between High-Load Resistance Training Versus Low-Load Resistance Training Associated with Blood-Flow Restriction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Manoel E. Lixandrão
    Carlos Ugrinowitsch
    Ricardo Berton
    Felipe C. Vechin
    Miguel S. Conceição
    Felipe Damas
    Cleiton A. Libardi
    Hamilton Roschel
    Sports Medicine, 2018, 48 : 361 - 378
  • [25] Magnitude of Muscle Strength and Mass Adaptations Between High-Load Resistance Training Versus Low-Load Resistance Training Associated with Blood-Flow Restriction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Lixandrao, Manoel E.
    Ugrinowitsch, Carlos
    Berton, Ricardo
    Vechin, Felipe C.
    Conceicao, Miguel S.
    Damas, Felipe
    Libardi, Cleiton A.
    Roschel, Hamilton
    SPORTS MEDICINE, 2018, 48 (02) : 361 - 378
  • [26] Effects of high-load and low-load resistance training in patients with coronary artery disease: rationale and design of a randomised controlled clinical trial
    Kambic, Tim
    Sarabon, Nejc
    Hadzic, Vedran
    Lainscak, Mitja
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (07):
  • [27] Unilateral high-load resistance training induced a similar cross-education of strength between the dominant and non-dominant arm
    Song, Jun Seob
    Hammert, William B.
    Kataoka, Ryo
    Yamada, Yujiro
    Kang, Anna
    Wong, Vickie
    Spitz, Robert W.
    Kassiano, Witalo
    Loenneke, Jeremy P.
    JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 2024, 42 (14) : 1308 - 1312
  • [28] Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chang, Hualong
    Yan, Jing
    Lu, Guiwei
    Chen, Biao
    Zhang, Jianli
    FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY, 2023, 14
  • [29] Skeletal Muscle Mitochondrial Protein Synthesis and Respiration Increase With Low-Load Blood Flow Restricted as Well as High-Load Resistance Training
    Groennebaek, Thomas
    Jespersen, Nichlas R.
    Jakobsgaard, Jesper Emil
    Sieljacks, Peter
    Wang, Jakob
    Rindom, Emil
    Musci, Robert, V
    Botker, Hans Erik
    Hamilton, Karyn L.
    Miller, Benjamin F.
    de Paoli, Frank, V
    Vissing, Kristian
    FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY, 2018, 9
  • [30] Body Composition Changes After Nine Weeks Of High- Or Low-load Resistance Training
    Bello, Marissa L.
    Shilling, Abigail N.
    Wood, Morgan R.
    Smith, JohnEric W.
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2023, 55 (09) : 539 - 540