Vieira, AF, Umpierre, D, Teodoro, JL, Lisboa, SC, Baroni, BM, Izquierdo, M, and Cadore, EL. Effects of resistance training performed to failure or not to failure on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and power output: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 35(4): 1165–1175, 2021—The aim of this review was to summarize the evidence from longitudinal studies assessing the effects induced by resistance training (RT) performed to failure (RTF) vs. not to failure (RTNF) on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and power output in adults. Three electronic databases were searched using terms related to RTF and RTNF. Studies were eligible if they met the following criteria: randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing the effects of RTF vs. RTNF on muscle hypertrophy, maximal strength, and muscle power in adults, and RT intervention ≥6 weeks. Results were presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) between treatments with 95% confidence intervals, and calculations were performed using random effects models. Significance was accepted when p < 0.05. Thirteen studies were included in this review. No difference was found between RTF and RTNF on maximal strength in overall analysis (SMD: −0.08; p = 0.642), but greater strength increase was observed in RTNF considering nonequalized volumes (SMD: −0.34; p = 0.048). Resistance training performed to failure showed a greater increase in muscle hypertrophy than RTNF (SMD: 0.75; p = 0.005), whereas no difference was observed considering equalized RT volumes. No difference was found between RTF and RTNF on muscle power considering overall analysis (SMD: −0.20; p = 0.239), whereas greater improvement was observed in RTNF considering nonequalized RT volumes (SMD: −0.61; p = 0.025). Resistance training not to failure may induce comparable or even greater improvements in maximal dynamic strength and power output, whereas no difference between RTF vs. RTNF is observed on muscle hypertrophy, considering equalized RT volumes.

No abstract

No abstract

Aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the agreement between heart rate (HR) and treadmill velocity corresponding to the anaerobic threshold measured by second ventilatory threshold (VT 2 ) and the HR deflection point (HRDP) in patients with type 2 diabetes. Materials and methods: Thirty-two sedentary patients (56.1 ± 7.7 years) were evaluated. To determine the threshold values, patients performed an incremental treadmill test, with an initial velocity of 3 km h −1 for 3 min, which was then increased by 1 km h −1 every 2 min. The degree of agreement between VT 2 and HRDP was analyzed using the Bland---Altman test. Results: Patients had a HR of 133 ± 16 bpm at VT 2 and 133 ± 18 bpm at HRDP. Mean velocity corresponding to VT 2 was 6.3 ± 0.7 km h −1 , and that corresponding to HRDP was 6.4 ± 1.1 km h −1 . There were no significant differences between the methods evaluated (HR: p = 0.78; mean velocity: p = 0.57). Conclusions:The present investigation concludes that there is an agreement between VT2 and HRDP methods for HR and treadmill velocity, and thus, either method may be used for these patients. © 2014 Consell Català de l'Esport. Document downloaded from http://www.apunts.org, day 24/12/2015. This copy is for personal use. Any transmission of this document by any media or format is strictly prohibited. Document downloaded from http://www.apunts.org, day 13/01/2016. This copy is for personal use. Any transmission of this document by any media or format is strictly prohibited. R.S. Delevatti et al. PALABRAS CLAVEUmbral ventilatorio; Segundo umbral ventilatorio; Punto de desviación de la frecuencia cardiaca; Ejercicio; Diabetes tipo 2 Punto de desviación de la frecuencia cardíaca es una alternativa de método para identificar el umbral anaeróbico en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2 Resumen Objetivos: El propósito de este artículo fue evaluar la concordancia entre frecuencia cardíaca (FC) y velocidad en la cinta de correr correspondiente al umbral anaeróbico medido por el segundo umbral ventilatorio (VT 2 ) y por el punto de deflexión de la FC (PDFC) en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2. Métodos: Se evaluaron treinta y dos pacientes sedentarios (56,1 ± 7,7 años) para determinar los valores de los umbrales, los pacientes realizaron una prueba de esfuerzo incremental a una velocidad inicial de 3 km h −1 durante 3 min, con incrementos de 1 km h −1 cada 2 min. Se analizó el grado de concordancia entre VT 2 y PDFC mediante el test de Bland---Altman. Resultados: Los pacientes mostraron una FC de 133 ± 16 lpm en VT 2 y 133 ± 18 lpm en PDFC.La velocidad media correspondiente a VT 2 fue 6,3 ± 0,7 km h −1 y la correspondiente a PDFC fue 6,4 ± 1,1 km h −1 . No hubo diferencias significativas entre los métodos evaluados (FC: p = 0,78; velocidad media: p = 0,57). Conclusión: Esta investigación concluye que existe correspondencia entre los métodos VT 2 y PDFC en FC y la velocidad media en la cinta de correr, por lo tanto, cualquiera de estos dos métodos puede ser usado en estos pacientes.