Consumo de oxigênio de recuperação em resposta a duas sessões de treinamento de força com diferentes intensidades

Almeida, Ana Paula Viola de; Coertjens, Marcelo; Cadore, Eduardo Lusa; Geremia, Jeam Marcel; Silva, Adriano Eduardo Lima da; Kruel, Luiz Fernando Martins

doi:10.1590/s1517-86922011000200013

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present systematic review, we found three studies (Kirk et al , ; Almeida et al , ; Cesar et al , ) using high intensities (between 80–90% 1RM) in their ST protocols. Kirk et al () verified the effect of high intensity and low volume (1 set; 3 days per week; 3–6 repetition; 85–90% of 1RM; 9 exercises) in EE.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…According to the studies presented in (Table 2), 75% assessed the intensity in percent values comprised between 50 and 75% (moderate) of one maximum repetition (%1RM) while, three studies (Kirk et al, 2009;Almeida et al, 2011;Cesar et al, 2013) (25%) addressed vigorous intensity > 80% 1RM and three studies (Hunter et al, 2003;Kirk et al, 2009;Scott et al, 2009) (18%) involved an intensity lower when compared with 50% 1RM.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can intensity in strength training change caloric expenditure? Systematic review and meta‐analysis

João¹,

Rodríguez²,

Tavares

et al. 2019

Clin Physio Funct Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Strength training (ST) is considered an important strategy for maintaining body weight, as it promotes an increase in total energy expenditure (EE). However, the combination and manipulation of variables (intensity and volume) allow for different training adaptations. However, it remains unclear as to what is the most important variable between volume or intensity for example number of sets, repetitions, or total load for maximizing EE during ST. Several studies have analyzed the EE response in ST, but still unclear the variable is able to increase EE in the ST. Objective This review aimed to investigate the effect of ST on EE in adults using a systematic literature review and subsequent meta-analysis. Methods The search was performed on the electronic databases using the following keywords: strength training (resistance training; strength training; strength training method) and energy expenditure (energy metabolism; energy expenditure; caloric expenditure, caloric cost) with 'AND' and 'OR' combination. Manual searches of references were also conducted for additional relevant studies. After evaluating the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the selected studies were analysed according to strength training methods and the training variables used to measure EE. Results We identified two ST methods from the literature review: circuit training (CT) and traditional training (TT). Meta-analysis showed a significant effect on EE increase, which favour TT when compared with CT [À0Á99 (95%CI: À1Á96, À0Á02), P<0Á01] with I 2 of 89% (P<0Á01). After adjusting for bias risk, no significant differences were found in EE associated with intensity [À0Á40, 95% CI (0Á98, 0Á18), P = 0Á18). Conclusion The present review and meta-analysis indicated that the intensity of exercise does not seem to be associated with an increase of EE in ST.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can intensity in strength training change caloric expenditure? Systematic review and meta‐analysis

João¹,

Rodríguez²,

Tavares

et al. 2019

Clin Physio Funct Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many studies have been analyzing the physiological responses of exercises of different intensities, what is perceived is that the data obtained from them are, many times, controversial because some [25][26][27] suggest there is no difference between the variables analyzed, while others suggest that there is difference between the protocols. [28][29][30] Analyzing all the data and comparing them with many studies it is perceived that the EPOC and the energetic expenditure in recuperation vary according to the type of exercise being practiced, the volume, and intensity applied in the exercise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Epoc and Recovery Energy Expenditure Between Hiit and Continuous Aerobic Exercise Training

Ahlert

Matzenbacher

Albarello

et al. 2019

Rev Bras Med Esporte

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare EPOC - excess post-exercise oxygen consumption and recovery energy expenditure between high intensity interval aerobic exercise (HIIT) and continuous aerobic exercise in adult amateur runners. Methods: The study included 10 runners, with a mean age of 35.7 ± 5.87 years, height 1.69 ± 0.11 m; body mass 74.13 ± 11.26 kg; fat percentage 19.31 ± 4.27% and maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) of 3.50 ± 0.64 l/kg/min-1. The continuous aerobic exercise protocol consisted of 20 minutes of running with intensity of 70-75% HRmax. Two 20-second cycles of 8 sprints were performed for HIIT at the highest possible speed, with 10 seconds of rest and a 3-minute interval between cycles. The sample group performed the two protocols at least 48 hours and at most one week apart. EPOC was observed using ergospirometry after the running protocols, and mean consumption was analyzed between 25-30 minutes after exercise. Oxygen consumption at 9-10 minutes was used for resting consumption. The study has a cross-sectional experimental design. Results: Oxygen consumption of 0.57 ± 0.29l/kg/min1 and energy expenditure of 2.84 ± 1.44 kcal/min were observed for continuous aerobic exercise, with values of 0.61 ± 0.62 l/kg/min−1 and 3.06 ± 1.10 kcal/min respectively (p <0.05) for HIIT. Conclusion: The protocols performed did not show a statistically significant difference in terms of EPOC and energy expenditure, but the performance of HIIT increased lipid metabolism for exercise recovery, which may favor the weight loss process. Moreover, this activity model takes up less time. Level of evidence I, randomized clinical trial.

show abstract

“…The indication of strength training (ST) as a non-pharmacological strategy in the prevention and treatment of obesity is currently considered effective and efficient. 1 Significant increases in oxygen consumption and consequently in energy expenditure (EE), depending on variables such as muscle mass, 2 lifting tempo, 3 number of sets, 4 number of repetitions, 5,6 training load, 7 training volume, 8 or recovery intervals, [9][10][11][12] have been widely investigated and used on the basis of exercise prescription.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the Number of Joints Involved in Exercise Promote Changes in Energy Expenditure?

João

Rodríguez

Rica

et al. 2020

Rev Bras Med Esporte

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The benefits of strength training (ST) include not only strength improvement but also favorable body composition changes, which has led to a considerable increase in the indication of this training method in overweight and obese individuals, and has made the investigation of outcomes attributed to different manipulations of ST variables an important task. However, acute metabolic responses related to energy expenditure (EE) associated with the manipulation of exercises which, in turn, are associated with the number of joints involved in movement, are still inconclusive. Objective: To verify the influence of the number of joints involved in movement on EE with equalized volume in ST at different intensities. Methods: This training program was held on alternate days, with a 48-hour interval between each session, and with two randomized protocols, as follows: multi joint protocol with four common exercises for ST participants compared to the single joint protocol with four exercises. Each protocol was evaluated at three training intensities (90%, 75% and 60% of 1-RM) according to the one-repetition maximum test. Results: Significant increases in EE were observed in the multi joint session as compared to the single joint session: 90% 1-RM multi joint 246.80 ± 26.17 kcal vs single joint 227.40 ± 24.54 kcal (∆ -7.86, 95% CI 7.33; 31.46; t 3.44; p <0.05); 75% 1-RM multi joint 124.13 ± 25.40 kcal vs single joint 111.80 ± 22.78 kcal (∆ -9.93, 95% CI 3.25; 21.41; t 2.91; p <0.05); 60% 1-RM multi joint 70.80 ± 6.28 kcal vs single joint 64.40 ± 6.72 kcal (∆-9.04, 95% CI 3.95; 8.84; t 5.60; p <0.05). Conclusion: Multi joint exercises may be a variable to consider when EE balance is the main target of the ST program. However, further studies are needed to supplement our findings. Level of evidence II; Diagnostic studies-Investigating a diagnostic test.

show abstract

Consumo de oxigênio de recuperação em resposta a duas sessões de treinamento de força com diferentes intensidades

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Can intensity in strength training change caloric expenditure? Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Can intensity in strength training change caloric expenditure? Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Comparison of Epoc and Recovery Energy Expenditure Between Hiit and Continuous Aerobic Exercise Training

Does the Number of Joints Involved in Exercise Promote Changes in Energy Expenditure?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About