Comparison Between constant and decreasing rest intervals: influence on maximal strength and hypertrophy

Abstract

Most resistance training programs use constant rest period lengths between sets and exercises, but some programs use decreasing rest period lengths as training progresses. The aim of this study was to compare the effect on strength and hypertrophy of 8 weeks of resistance training using constant rest intervals (CIs) and decreasing rest intervals (DIs) between sets and exercises. Twenty young men recreationally trained in strength training were randomly assigned to either a CI or DI training group. During the first 2 weeks of training, 3 sets of 10-12 repetition maximum (RM) with 2-minute rest intervals between sets and exercises were performed by both groups. During the next 6 weeks of training, the CI group trained using 2 minutes between sets and exercises (4 sets of 8-10RM), and the DI group trained with DIs (2 minutes decreasing to 30 seconds) as the 6 weeks of training progressed (4 sets of 8-10RM). Total training volume of the bench press and squat were significantly lower for the DI compared to the CI group (bench press 9.4%, squat 13.9%) and weekly training volume of these same exercises was lower in the DI group from weeks 6 to 8 of training. Strength (1RM) in the bench press and squat, knee extensor and flexor isokinetic measures of peak torque, and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) using magnetic resonance imaging were assessed pretraining and posttraining. No significant differences (p < or = 0.05) were shown between the CI and DI training protocols for CSA (arm 13.8 vs. 14.5%, thigh 16.6 vs. 16.3%), 1RM (bench press 28 vs. 37%, squat 34 vs. 34%), and isokinetic peak torque. In conclusion, the results indicate that a training protocol with DI is just as effective as a CI protocol over short training periods (6 weeks) for increasing maximal strength and muscle CSA; thus, either type of program can be used over a short training period to cause strength and hypertrophy.

Strength and hypertrophy responses to constant and decreasing rest intervals in trained men using creatine supplementation

“…A previous study from our research group [15] compared the effect of 8-weeks of resistance training using CI and DI between sets and exercises on strength and hypertrophy. Recreationally resistance training subjects were randomly assigned to either a CI or DI training group.…”

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the right thigh and upper arm was performed using a standard body coil and a 2.0 Tesla Scanner (Elscint Prestige, Haifa, Israel) to determine muscle CSA [15] (Figure 1). The MRI equipment was calibrated prior to CSA determination of the first subject on each testing day using the manufacture's procedures.…”

“…The ability to accomplish a given volume of training with less rest between sets should allow for more efficient resistance training sessions when time is limited. However, to our knowledge, no studies have examined changes in maximal strength and hypertrophy consequent resistance training programs that involve different inter-rest interval lengths in conjunction with CR supplementation [15]. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to compare maximal strength and hypertrophy responses to resistance training programs using constant rest intervals (CI) (2-min) and decreasing rest intervals (DI) (2-min decreasing to 30-sec) between sets, during eight weeks of resistance training performed by trained men when supplementing with CR.…”

Comparison of the Effect of Delorme and Macqueen Strengthening Protocol for Improving Quadriceps Muscle Strength in Normal Female Individuals

“…Subjects were then demonstrated (on 1 st day) with the technique of performing knee extension on hurr device as per their respective protocols. After every set of 10 repetitions in both techniques, 2 minutes of rest interval was given to all the subjects [11]. Post strengthening session, cool down exercises in the form of stretching for lower extremity muscles was given to all subjects.…”

Isokinetic Dynamometry and 1RM Tests Produce Conflicting Results for Assessing Alterations in Muscle Strength

“…Although the two methods are widely used and accepted by the scientific community, the results obtained from them seem to differ considerably from each other. It is possible to find studies using the 1RM test showing strength gains of more than 100% after a relatively short period of training (Fiatarone et al, 1994; Frontera et al, 1988), whereas the mean changes measured by the PT test are typically below 20% after a similar period (de Souza et al, 2010; Feiereisen et al, 2010; Gentil et al, 2010). …”