Training of the trunk or core muscles for enhanced health, rehabilitation, and athletic performance has received renewed emphasis. Instability resistance exercises have become a popular means of training the core and improving balance. Whether instability resistance training is as, more, or less effective than traditional ground-based resistance training is not fully resolved. The purpose of this review is to address the effectiveness of instability resistance training for athletic, nonathletic, and rehabilitation conditioning. The anatomical core is defined as the axial skeleton and all soft tissues with a proximal attachment on the axial skeleton. Spinal stability is an interaction of passive and active muscle and neural subsystems. Training programs must prepare athletes for a wide variety of postures and external forces, and should include exercises with a destabilizing component. While unstable devices have been shown to be effective in decreasing the incidence of low back pain and increasing the sensory efficiency of soft tissues, they are not recommended as the primary exercises for hypertrophy, absolute strength, or power, especially in trained athletes. For athletes, ground-based free-weight exercises with moderate levels of instability should form the foundation of exercises to train the core musculature. Instability resistance exercises can play an important role in periodization and rehabilitation, and as alternative exercises for the recreationally active individual with less interest or access to ground-based free-weight exercises. Based on the relatively high proportion of type I fibers, the core musculature might respond well to multiple sets with high repetitions (e.g., >15 per set); however, a particular sport may necessitate fewer repetitions.

In recent years, fitness practitioners have increasingly recommended core stability exercises in sports conditioning programs. Greater core stability may benefit sports performance by providing a foundation for greater force production in the upper and lower extremities. Traditional resistance exercises have been modified to emphasize core stability. Such modifications have included performing exercises on unstable rather than stable surfaces, performing exercises while standing rather than seated, performing exercises with free weights rather than machines, and performing exercises unilaterally rather than bilaterally. Despite the popularity of core stability training, relatively little scientific research has been conducted to demonstrate the benefits for healthy athletes. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to critically examine core stability training and other issues related to this topic to determine useful applications for sports conditioning programs. Based on the current literature, prescription of core stability exercises should vary based on the phase of training and the health status of the athlete. During preseason and in-season mesocycles, free weight exercises performed while standing on a stable surface are recommended for increases in core strength and power. Free weight exercises performed in this manner are specific to the core stability requirements of sports-related skills due to moderate levels of instability and high levels of force production. Conversely, during postseason and off-season mesocycles, Swiss ball exercises involving isometric muscle actions, small loads, and long tension times are recommended for increases in core endurance. Furthermore, balance board and stability disc exercises, performed in conjunction with plyometric exercises, are recommended to improve proprioceptive and reactive capabilities, which may reduce the likelihood of lower extremity injuries.

Strength training has become one of the most popular physical activities for increasing characteristics such as absolute muscular strength, endurance, hypertrophy and muscular power. For efficient, safe and effective training, it is of utmost importance to understand the interaction among training variables, which might include the intensity, number of sets, rest interval between sets, exercise modality and velocity of muscle action. Research has indicated that the rest interval between sets is an important variable that affects both acute responses and chronic adaptations to resistance exercise programmes. The purpose of this review is to analyse and discuss the rest interval between sets for targeting specific training outcomes (e.g. absolute muscular strength, endurance, hypertrophy and muscular power). The Scielo, Science Citation Index, National Library of Medicine, MEDLINE, Scopus, Sport Discus and CINAHL databases were used to locate previous original scientific investigations. The 35 studies reviewed examined both acute responses and chronic adaptations, with rest interval length as the experimental variable. In terms of acute responses, a key finding was that when training with loads between 50% and 90% of one repetition maximum, 3-5 minutes' rest between sets allowed for greater repetitions over multiple sets. Furthermore, in terms of chronic adaptations, resting 3-5 minutes between sets produced greater increases in absolute strength, due to higher intensities and volumes of training. Similarly, higher levels of muscular power were demonstrated over multiple sets with 3 or 5 minutes versus 1 minute of rest between sets. Conversely, some experiments have demonstrated that when testing maximal strength, 1-minute rest intervals might be sufficient between repeated attempts; however, from a psychological and physiological standpoint, the inclusion of 3- to 5-minute rest intervals might be safer and more reliable. When the training goal is muscular hypertrophy, the combination of moderate-intensity sets with short rest intervals of 30-60 seconds might be most effective due to greater acute levels of growth hormone during such workouts. Finally, the research on rest interval length in relation to chronic muscular endurance adaptations is less clear. Training with short rest intervals (e.g. 20 seconds to 1 minute) resulted in higher repetition velocities during repeated submaximal muscle actions and also greater total torque during a high-intensity cycle test. Both of these findings indirectly demonstrated the benefits of utilizing short rest intervals for gains in muscular endurance. In summary, the rest interval between sets is an important variable that should receive more attention in resistance exercise prescription. When prescribed appropriately with other important prescriptive variables (i.e. volume and intensity), the amount of rest between sets can influence the efficiency, safety and ultimate effectiveness of a strength training programme.

No abstract

This study evaluated the effect of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on resistance exercise performance in the lower limbs. Thirteen men participated in a randomized crossover design that involved 3 separate sessions (IPC, PLACEBO, and control). A 12-repetition maximum (12RM) load for the leg extension exercise was assessed through test and retest sessions before the first experimental session. The IPC session consisted of 4 cycles of 5 minutes of occlusion at 220 mm Hg of pressure alternated with 5 minutes of reperfusion at 0 mm Hg for a total of 40 minutes. The PLACEBO session consisted of 4 cycles of 5 minutes of cuff administration at 20 mm Hg of pressure alternated with 5 minutes of pseudo-reperfusion at 0 mm Hg for a total of 40 minutes. The occlusion and reperfusion phases were conducted alternately between the thighs, with subjects remaining seated. No ischemic pressure was applied during the control (CON) session and subjects sat passively for 40 minutes. Eight minutes after IPC, PLACEBO, or CON, subjects performed 3 repetition maximum sets of the leg extension (2-minute rest between sets) with the predetermined 12RM load. Four minutes after the third set for each condition, blood lactate was assessed. The results showed that for the first set, the number of repetitions significantly increased for both the IPC (13.08 ± 2.11; p = 0.0036) and PLACEBO (13.15 ± 0.88; p = 0.0016) conditions, but not for the CON (11.88 ± 1.07; p > 0.99) condition. In addition, the IPC and PLACEBO conditions resulted insignificantly greater repetitions vs. the CON condition on the first set (p = 0.015; p = 0.007) and second set (p = 0.011; p = 0.019), but not on the third set (p = 0.68; p > 0.99). No difference (p = 0.465) was found in the fatigue index and lactate concentration between conditions. These results indicate that IPC and PLACEBO IPC may have small beneficial effects on repetition performance over a CON condition. Owing to potential for greater discomfort associated with the IPC condition, it is suggested that ischemic preconditioning might be practiced gradually to assess tolerance and potential enhancements to exercise performance.

The use of instability devices and exercises to train the core musculature is an essential feature of many training centres and programs. It was the intent of this position stand to provide recommendations regarding the role of instability in resistance training programs designed to train the core musculature. The core is defined as the axial skeleton and all soft tissues with a proximal attachment originating on the axial skeleton, regardless of whether the soft tissue terminates on the axial or appendicular skeleton. Core stability can be achieved with a combination of muscle activation and intra-abdominal pressure. Abdominal bracing has been shown to be more effective than abdominal hollowing in optimizing spinal stability. When similar exercises are performed, core and limb muscle activation are reported to be higher under unstable conditions than under stable conditions. However, core muscle activation that is similar to or higher than that achieved in unstable conditions can also be achieved with ground-based free-weight exercises, such as Olympic lifts, squats, and dead lifts. Since the addition of unstable bases to resistance exercises can decrease force, power, velocity, and range of motion, they are not recommended as the primary training mode for athletic conditioning. However, the high muscle activation with the use of lower loads associated with instability resistance training suggests they can play an important role within a periodized training schedule, in rehabilitation programs, and for nonathletic individuals who prefer not to use ground-based free weights to achieve musculoskeletal health benefits.

Results indicate that training with a load of 30% 1-RM to momentary muscular failure does not maximally activate the full motor unit pool of the quadriceps femoris and hamstrings during performance of multi-joint lower body exercise.

The purpose of this research was to compare differences between 3 different rest intervals on the squat and bench press volume completed during a workout. Fifteen college-aged men volunteered to participate in this study (age 20.73 +/- 2.60 years; body mass 80.73 +/- 10.80 kg). All subjects performed 3 testing sessions, during which 4 sets of the squat and bench press were performed with an 8 repetition maximum (8RM) load. During each testing session, the squat and bench press were performed with a 1, 2, or 5-minute rest interval between sets. Volume was defined as the total number of repetitions completed over 4 sets for each rest condition. Statistical analysis was conducted separately for the squat and bench press. One-way repeated analyses of variance with Bonferroni post hocs demonstrated significant differences between each rest condition for both exercises tested (p < 0.05). The 5-minute rest condition resulted in the highest volume completed, followed in descending order by the 2- and 1-minute rest conditions. The ability to perform a higher volume of training with a given load may stimulate greater strength adaptations.