PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) to measure effort during different types of resistance training. METHOD:Fifteen male subjects (age 26.7 +/- 4.3 years) performed 3 protocols. All protocols consisted of same 5 exercises but with different intensities, rest periods, and numbers of repetitions. One-repetition maximum (1-RM) was defined as the maximal amount of weight that an individual could lift 1 time without support. The strength protocol included 3 sets of 5 repetitions at 90% of 1-RM with 3 min rest between. The hypertrophy session included 3 sets of 10 repetitions at 70% with 1 min of rest, and the power session included 3 sets of 5 repetitions at 50% with 3 min of rest. Session RPE is a modification of the standard RPE scale. Session and standard RPE were measured after the completion of each set and 30 min postexercise, respectively. RESULTS: Results showed a difference between both the 2 RPE values of the strength and hypertrophy protocols (P ? .05) but no difference between mean and session RPE values for the power protocol. During the familiarization session, session RPE was measured at 5-min intervals for 30 min postexercise. There was a significant difference (P ? .05) between the mean RPE values at the fifth and tenth min postexercise when compared with 30 min postexercise. All other session RPE values showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: The session RPE method appears to be effective in monitoring different types of resistance training, and session RPE after 30 min was a better indicator of the overall resistance sessions than average RPE.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) to measure effort during different types of resistance training. METHOD: Fifteen male subjects (age 26.7 +/- 4.3 years) performed 3 protocols. All protocols consisted of same 5 exercises but with different intensities, rest periods, and numbers of repetitions. One-repetition maximum (1-RM) was defined as the maximal amount of weight that an individual could lift 1 time without support. The strength protocol included 3 sets of 5 repetitions at 90% of 1-RM with 3 min rest between. The hypertrophy session included 3 sets of 10 repetitions at 70% with 1 min of rest, and the power session included 3 sets of 5 repetitions at 50% with 3 min of rest. Session RPE is a modification of the standard RPE scale. Session and standard RPE were measured after the completion of each set and 30 min postexercise, respectively. RESULTS: Results showed a difference between both the 2 RPE values of the strength and hypertrophy protocols (P ? .05) but no difference between mean and session RPE values for the power protocol. During the familiarization session, session RPE was measured at 5-min intervals for 30 min postexercise. There was a significant difference (P ? .05) between the mean RPE values at the fifth and tenth min postexercise when compared with 30 min postexercise. All other session RPE values showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: The session RPE method appears to be effective in monitoring different types of resistance training, and session RPE after 30 min was a better indicator of the overall resistance sessions than average RPE.
Authors: Justin P Hardee; Marcus M Lawrence; Alan C Utter; N Travis Triplett; Kevin A Zwetsloot; Jeffrey M McBride Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2012-01-04 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Luke Haile; Fredric L Goss; Robert J Robertson; Joseph L Andreacci; Michael Gallagher; Elizabeth F Nagle Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Marco C Uchida; Luis F M Teixeira; Vladmir J Godoi; Paulo H Marchetti; Marcelo Conte; Aaron J Coutts; Reury F P Bacurau Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2014-01-20 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Jennifer L Russell; Blake D McLean; Franco M Impellizzeri; Donnie S Strack; Aaron J Coutts Journal: Sports Med Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 11.136