Castle View High School Strength and Conditioning Coach says science is leading to safer training methods being used in high school weight rooms.

Resistance training (RT) is a nonpharmacological complement to cancer treatments due to its effectiveness in attenuating sarcopenia, cardiotoxicity, fatigue, and emotional disorders common in oncology patients. To adequately program and evaluate the acute or long-term effects of this type of training, a proper evaluation of the patients’ strength levels is necessary. Strength evaluations traditionally applied to this population required reaching muscle or technical failure, which could increase their discomfort levels, risk of injury, or other complications associated with the disease. In this regard, this manuscript described different dynamic and isometric evaluations recommended to accurately and safely evaluate the strength of the oncology population. Concerning dynamic evaluations, the velocity based method is recommended to determine the capacity of the patient to apply force against maximal (i.e., 1 repetition maximum) and submaximal loads. The sit-to-stand or vertical jump tests are also proposed as alternatives to evaluate dynamic strength using body weight. For isometric assessments, the knee extension and handgrip tests could complement dynamic evaluations or replace them for patients with very low strength levels. Besides describing in depth the aforementioned evaluations, the current review proposes important methodological aspects to ensure their accurate, reliable, and safe implementation.

The primary aim of this study was to systematically compare the effectiveness of blood flow restriction training (BFR) versus traditional resistance training (TRT) to improve muscle size in healthy adults. Secondary outcomes were improvements in muscle strength and endurance. We performed a systematic searchwithmeta-analysis. Using predetermined criteria, 541 unique articles were identified through databases and bibliographies. After screening titles, abstracts, and full texts, 20 articles were included in the review. All 20 articles evaluated muscle hypertrophy, 19 evaluated strength, and 1 evaluated endurance in response to BFR and TRT. Data from 10 articles were included in the meta-analysis. In the qualitative analysis, TRT and BFR increased muscle size without differences between conditions for at least 1 hypertrophy outcome in 13 studies, and TRT or BFR differentially improved hypertrophy in 5 studies. TRT and BFR increased strength without differences between conditions for at least 1 outcome in 15 studies, and TRT or BFR differentially improved strength in 9 studies. Results from the meta-analysis indicate no differences in muscle size (ES 5 0.045, 95% CI [20.278 to 0.367]) or strength (ES520.149, 95% CI [20.439 to 0.141]) improvements with BFR versus TRT. Practitioners can implement BFR training to increase muscle size and strength as appropriate, especially for training periods of 8 weeks or longer.

The Council on Accreditation of Strength and Conditioning Education, commonly referred to as CASCE, is a nonprofit accrediting agency devoted to advancing the strength and conditioning profession. We provide accreditation to collegiate-level education programs specializing in strength and conditioning. We rely on peer-reviews by academic and industry professionals to assess standards of quality, ensuring relevant curriculum and effective instruction.

Apply to become an NSCA School of Distinction and gain national recognition for your K-12 strength and conditioning program. Learn how to qualify and elevate your school’s fitness standards.

Strength and Conditioning Coaches who are NSCA-Certified are preparing youth for training, using proven strategies that improve their safety and competitiveness.