ABSTRACT
This study compared the perceptual responses, physiological indicators and technical parameters between different training protocols focused on upper body exercises. A randomized crossover design was performed, and 12 trained individuals (age: 27.1 ± 5.7 years; height: 173.7 ± 10.7 cm; BMI: 23.9 ± 2.3) completed three resistance training sessions under different protocols separated by at least 72 h: traditional training (TT) (4 x 6 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 120 s of rest between sets), cluster 1 (CL1) (4 x 2+2+2 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 15 s of intra-rep rest and 80 s between sets), and cluster 2 (CL2) (24 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 15 s of inter-set recovery). Before training, arterial blood pressure (BP) and repetitions to failure of pull-up and push-up (FT) were collected. Muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2) in the chest and movement velocity were evaluated in barbell bench press during the training session. After finishing, lactate, BP, rate of perceived exertion and FT were assessed. The percentage of velocity loss (TT: 19.24%; CL1: 5.02% and CL2: 7.30%) in the bench press and lactate concentration (TT: 8.90 mmol·l-1; CL1: 6.13 mmol·l-1 and CL2: 5.48 mmol·l-1) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) for TT compared to both CLs. RPE values were higher (p < 0.05) in TT compared to CL1 (7.95 a.u. vs. 6.91 a.u., respectively). No differences (p > 0.05) were found between protocols for SmO2, BP, FT, pain or heart rate between set configurations. Cluster configurations allow one to maintain higher movement velocity and lower lactate and RPE values compared to a traditional configuration, but with similar concentrations of SmO2.
ABSTRACT
The addition of a hypoxic stimulus during resistance training is suggested to increase the metabolic responses, enhancing hypertrophy and muscle strength. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of resistance training performed at submaximal intensities combined with normobaric hypoxia on muscular performance, body composition and haematological parameters. Thirty-two untrained subjects participated in this study (weight: 74.68±12.89 kg; height: 175±0.08 cm; BMI: 24.28±3.80 kg/m2). They were randomized to two groups: hypoxia (FiO2 = 13%) or normoxia (FiO2 = 20.9%). The training programme lasted 7 weeks (3 d/w) and several muscle groups were exercised (3 sets x 65-80% 1RM to failure). Measurements were taken before, after the training and after a 3-week detraining period. Body composition and muscle mass were assessed through skinfolds and muscle girths. Muscle strength was evaluated by the 1RM estimated test. Finally, haemoglobin and haematocrit were taken from the antecubital vein. Both groups improved their strength performance and muscle perimeters, but the hypoxia group obtained a greater increase in muscle mass (hypoxia: +1.80% vs. normoxia: +0.38%; p<0.05) and decrease in fat mass (hypoxia: -6.83% vs. normoxia: +1.26%; p<0.05) compared to the normoxia group. Additionally, haematocrit values were also higher for the hypoxia group after the detraining period (hypoxia: +2.20% vs. normoxia: -2.22%; p<0.05). In conclusion, resistance training under hypoxic conditions could increase muscle mass and decrease fat mass more effectively than training performed in normoxia, but without contributing to greater muscle strength.
