Chronic Effects of Altering Resistance Training Set Configurations Using Cluster Sets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Davies, Timothy B.; Tran, Derek; Hogan, Clorinda; Haff, G. Gregory; Latella, Christopher

doi:10.1007/s40279-020-01408-3

Cited by 31 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Crucially, maximizing late rate of force development is the paramount component of the force–time curve to optimize 1RM strength as shifting the force–time curve towards late rate of force development-oriented profiles optimizes the peak absolute force (absolute load) that can be produced [ 69 , 70 ]. It is important to recognize that when percentage of 1RM and total repetitions are matched, maximizing intra-set force production with alternative set structures does not result in meaningfully different chronic strength adaptations compared to traditional sets as supported in two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses [ 26 , 37 ]. Rather, increases in the force component of the force–velocity curve for 1RM strength adaptations are largely contingent upon the load (i.e., percentage of 1RM) employed [ 50 , 51 , 71 , 72 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Proximity to failure and neuromuscular fatigue is of paramount importance when considering the design of RT programs [ 37 ]. Although training to failure has traditionally been promoted for overload [ 38 , 39 ], this practice elevates muscle damage and elongates recovery time considerably compared to not training to failure [ 40 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated no difference in hypertrophy between training to failure compared to not training to failure when volume was equalized [ 41 , 42 ]. Similarly, two separate systematic reviews and meta-analyses also demonstrated no difference in hypertrophy between traditional sets compared to alternative set structures when relative intensity and relative volume were equated, which further demonstrates that considerable magnitudes of intra-set fatigue are unnecessary to promote hypertrophy [ 26 , 37 ]. Despite this, all four systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated no difference in strength adaptations between comparisons [ 26 , 37 , 41 , 42 ]; however, appropriately managing the dynamic inter-play amidst proximity to failure and neuromuscular fatigue by integrating load and volume autoregulation strategies may have important practical implications [ 6 , 43 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, two separate systematic reviews and meta-analyses also demonstrated no difference in hypertrophy between traditional sets compared to alternative set structures when relative intensity and relative volume were equated, which further demonstrates that considerable magnitudes of intra-set fatigue are unnecessary to promote hypertrophy [ 26 , 37 ]. Despite this, all four systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated no difference in strength adaptations between comparisons [ 26 , 37 , 41 , 42 ]; however, appropriately managing the dynamic inter-play amidst proximity to failure and neuromuscular fatigue by integrating load and volume autoregulation strategies may have important practical implications [ 6 , 43 ]. To illustrate, when sets and repetitions per set are matched, autoregulating set-to-set load to match the individual’s performance by training at closer proximities to failure (i.e., at higher relative intensities) results in significantly greater 1RM strength adaptations [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Autoregulation has emerged as a potentially beneficial resistance training paradigm to individualize and optimize programming; however, compared to standardized prescription, the effects of autoregulated load and volume prescription on muscular strength and hypertrophy adaptations are unclear. Our objective was to compare the effect of autoregulated load prescription (repetitions in reserve-based rating of perceived exertion and velocity-based training) to standardized load prescription (percentage-based training) on chronic one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength and cross-sectional area (CSA) hypertrophy adaptations in resistance-trained individuals. We also aimed to investigate the effect of volume autoregulation with velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% compared to > 25% on 1RM strength and CSA hypertrophy. Methods This review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus was conducted. Mean differences (MD), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. Sub-analyses were performed as applicable. Results Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis: six studies on load autoregulation and nine studies on volume autoregulation. No significant differences between autoregulated and standardized load prescription were demonstrated for 1RM strength (MD = 2.07, 95% CI – 0.32 to 4.46 kg, p = 0.09, SMD = 0.21). Velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% demonstrated significantly greater 1RM strength (MD = 2.32, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.31 kg, p = 0.02, SMD = 0.23) and significantly lower CSA hypertrophy (MD = 0.61, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.16 cm2, p = 0.03, SMD = 0.28) than velocity loss thresholds > 25%. No significant differences between velocity loss thresholds > 25% and 20–25% were demonstrated for hypertrophy (MD = 0.36, 95% CI – 0.29 to 1.00 cm2, p = 0.28, SMD = 0.13); however, velocity loss thresholds > 25% demonstrated significantly greater hypertrophy compared to thresholds ≤ 20% (MD = 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.20 cm2, p = 0.03, SMD = 0.34). Conclusions Collectively, autoregulated and standardized load prescription produced similar improvements in strength. When sets and relative intensity were equated, velocity loss thresholds ≤ 25% were superior for promoting strength possibly by minimizing acute neuromuscular fatigue while maximizing chronic neuromuscular adaptations, whereas velocity loss thresholds > 20–25% were superior for promoting hypertrophy by accumulating greater relative volume. Protocol Registration The original protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42021240506) with the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If participants are unable to complete the resistance exercise set with continuous repetitions, an intra-set rest (“cluster” set) may be provided. This method produces comparable results to completing the set using traditional set structures (i.e., completing the prescribed repetition range in a set without rest) in healthy and clinical cohorts ( 133 , 134 ).…”

Section: Study Design and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Exercise Intolerance, Benefits, and Prescription for People Living With a Fontan Circulation: The Fontan Fitness Intervention Trial (F-FIT)—Rationale and Design

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite developments in surgical techniques and medical care, people with a Fontan circulation still experience long-term complications; non-invasive therapies to optimize the circulation have not been established. Exercise intolerance affects the majority of the population and is associated with worse prognosis. Historically, people living with a Fontan circulation were advised to avoid physical activity, but a small number of heterogenous, predominantly uncontrolled studies have shown that exercise training is safe—and for unique reasons, may even be of heightened importance in the setting of Fontan physiology. The mechanisms underlying improvements in aerobic exercise capacity and the effects of exercise training on circulatory and end-organ function remain incompletely understood. Furthermore, the optimal methods of exercise prescription are poorly characterized. This highlights the need for large, well-designed, multi-center, randomized, controlled trials.Aims and Methods: The Fontan Fitness Intervention Trial (F-FIT)—a phase III clinical trial—aims to optimize exercise prescription and delivery in people with a Fontan circulation. In this multi-center, randomized, controlled study, eligible Fontan participants will be randomized to either a 4-month supervised aerobic and resistance exercise training program of moderate-to-vigorous intensity followed by an 8-month maintenance phase; or usual care (control group). Adolescent and adult (≥16 years) Fontan participants will be randomized to either traditional face-to-face exercise training, telehealth exercise training, or usual care in a three-arm trial with an allocation of 2:2:1 (traditional:telehealth:control). Children (<16 years) will be randomized to either a physical activity and exercise program of moderate-to-vigorous intensity or usual care in a two-arm trial with a 1:1 allocation. The primary outcome is a change in aerobic exercise capacity (peak oxygen uptake) at 4-months. Secondary outcomes include safety, and changes in cardiopulmonary exercise testing measures, peripheral venous pressure, respiratory muscle and lung function, body composition, liver stiffness, neuropsychological and neurocognitive function, physical activity levels, dietary and nutritional status, vascular function, neurohormonal activation, metabolites, cardiac function, quality of life, musculoskeletal fitness, and health care utilization. Outcome measures will be assessed at baseline, 4-months, and 12-months. This manuscript will describe the pathophysiology of exercise intolerance in the Fontan circulation and the rationale and protocol for the F-FIT.

show abstract

Strengthening the Case for Cluster Set Resistance Training in Aged and Clinical Settings: Emerging Evidence, Proposed Benefits and Suggestions

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic Effects of Altering Resistance Training Set Configurations Using Cluster Sets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cited by 31 publications

References 70 publications

The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Exercise Intolerance, Benefits, and Prescription for People Living With a Fontan Circulation: The Fontan Fitness Intervention Trial (F-FIT)—Rationale and Design

Strengthening the Case for Cluster Set Resistance Training in Aged and Clinical Settings: Emerging Evidence, Proposed Benefits and Suggestions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About