Literature DB >> 16937965

Kinematic, kinetic, and blood lactate profiles of continuous and intraset rest loading schemes.

James Denton1, John B Cronin.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the acute kinematic, kinetic, and blood lactate responses to continuous and intraset rest loading schemes that differed in terms of rest frequency but not total rest duration. Nine male subjects performed an isoinertial bench press task (6 repetition maximum load) with a continuous, an intraset rest equated by total rest time, volume, and load (ISRV), and an intraset rest equated by total rest time and load (ISRR) loading scheme. The scheme order was assigned in a block-randomized order with a minimum of 48 hours of recovery between testing sessions. Attached to the bar of the Smith machine was a linear position transducer that measured vertical displacement with an accuracy of 0.01 cm. Displacement data was sampled at 1,000 Hz and collected by a laptop computer running custom-built data acquisition software. Finger prick blood lactate samples were taken from the nondominant hand before exercise, immediately after exercise, and 5, 15 and 30 minutes after exercise. Blood glucose samples were taken before exercise only. It was observed that manipulating the rest period, by increasing the frequency but decreasing the length of each rest period, did not significantly influence the kinematics and kinetics associated with resistance training, but did have an effect on the postexercise blood lactate response when the load, rest duration, and training volume were equated (ISRV). This finding may be of practical significance if fatigue is important in strength development or conversely if power training requires minimal fatigue. It was also observed that increasing the frequency of the rest period enabled the subjects to perform a greater number of repetitions (ISRR), resulting in significantly greater kinematics, kinetics, and blood lactate accumulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16937965     DOI: 10.1519/18135.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  10 in total

1.  Effect of a rest-pause vs. traditional squat on electromyography and lifting volume in trained women.

Authors:  John A Korak; Max R Paquette; Dana K Fuller; Jennifer L Caputo; John M Coons
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Lactate Kinetics during Multiple Set Resistance Exercise.

Authors:  Nicolas Wirtz; Patrick Wahl; Heinz Kleinöder; Joachim Mester
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2014-01-20       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  Acute Effects of Cluster and Rest Redistribution Set Structures on Mechanical, Metabolic, and Perceptual Fatigue During and After Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ivan Jukic; Amador García Ramos; Eric R Helms; Michael R McGuigan; James J Tufano
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  The Effects of Set Structure Manipulation on Chronic Adaptations to Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ivan Jukic; Bas Van Hooren; Amador García Ramos; Eric R Helms; Michael R McGuigan; James J Tufano
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  The impact of repetition mechanics on the adaptations resulting from strength-, hypertrophy- and cluster-type resistance training.

Authors:  G Nicholson; T Ispoglou; A Bissas
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 3.078

6.  Effects of Cluster Sets and Rest-Redistribution on Mechanical Responses to Back Squats in Trained Men.

Authors:  James J Tufano; Jenny A Conlon; Sophia Nimphius; Lee E Brown; Alex Petkovic; Justin Frick; G Gregory Haff
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 2.193

7.  Similar acute physiological responses from effort and duration matched leg press and recumbent cycling tasks.

Authors:  James Steele; Andrew Butler; Zoe Comerford; Jason Dyer; Nathan Lloyd; Joshua Ward; James Fisher; Paulo Gentil; Christopher Scott; Hayao Ozaki
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  A comparison of traditional and novel metrics to quantify resistance training.

Authors:  Kieran J Marston; Jeremiah J Peiffer; Michael J Newton; Brendan R Scott
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Effect of cluster set configurations on mechanical variables during the deadlift exercise.

Authors:  Gavin L Moir; Bruce W Graham; Shala E Davis; John J Guers; Chad A Witmer
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 2.193

10.  Effectiveness of combining microcurrent with resistance training in trained males.

Authors:  Fernando Naclerio; Marcos Seijo; Bettina Karsten; George Brooker; Leandro Carbone; Jack Thirkell; Eneko Larumbe-Zabala
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 3.078

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.