One resistance training variable that may be altered to achieve desired outcomes is the range of motion used in training. Generally, the strength and conditioning field has accepted that using a greater range of motion in strength training exercises results in more substantial muscle hypertrophy outcomes. However, this theory has proved to be inconsistently supported in the literature, and to date, no sufficient explanation exists to explain this phenomenon. This review article seeks to outline a novel approach for potentially describing the disparities seen in range of motion research with respect to hypertrophy outcomes by applying the unique length-tension curve of each muscle being examined. As will be discussed in the review, virtually all the results from range of motion studies in various muscles have corresponded to each muscle’s length-tension curve; muscles that are active on the descending limb of the curve appear to garner greater hypertrophy from using larger ranges of motion. Conversely, muscles that are not active on the descending limb exhibit similar adaptations despite alterations in range of motion. A novel hypothesis for applying this information to resistance training programs will be presented and discussed.
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.
Get NSCA's Essentials of Training Special Populations — a trusted resource for students, personal trainers, exercise science professionals, and CSPS® exam prep.
Position statements are official statements of the NSCA on topics related to strength and conditioning and exercise science. All NSCA Position Statements are published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research® and free to the public.
Velocity-based training (VBT) is a contemporary method of resistance training that enables accurate and objective prescription of resistance training intensities and volumes. This review provides an applied framework for the theory and application of VBT. Specifically, this review gives detail on how to: use velocity to provide objective feedback, estimate strength, develop load-velocity profiles for accurate load prescription, and how to use statistics to monitor velocity. Furthermore, a discussion on the use of velocity loss thresholds, different methods of VBT prescription, and how VBT can be implemented within traditional programming models and microcycles is provided.