IS DOING MORE BETTER? THE IMPLICATIONS OF ACCOUNTING FOR BASELINE TRAINING VOLUME IN PREVIOUSLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether increasing an individual’s baseline training volume on a per session basis influences the skeletal muscle growth response following 12 weeks of resistance training. METHODS: Forty-two resistance trained individuals completed unilateral elbow flexion resistance training twice weekly for a 12-week training period. Participants had each arm randomized to complete either a higher volume (HV) or lower volume (LV) condition. The amount of exercise volume performed was based on each individual’s average baseline training volume (per session) for the elbow flexion exercise. For example, if the individual regularly performed 4 sets per session, one arm was randomized to complete an additional 2 sets of exercise (i.e., HV), while the contralateral arm performed what they were regularly accustomed to (i.e., LV). Each condition performed exercise to muscular failure with 60s rest periods between sets and loads corresponding to an 8-12 repetition maximum (RM). Measures of muscle thickness (MT) and 1RM strength were taken prior to and following the 12-week training period. RESULTS: Changes in 1RM strength were no different between the higher volume [2.2 (1.6) kg] and lower volume conditions [2.3 (1.7) kg] (p = 0.52). For changes in MT, at the 50% muscle site, there was no interaction (p = 0.81) and there was no main effect for condition. However, there was a main effect for time (p < 0.001). Muscle size increased from pre to post intervention [mean change = 0.15 (0.09-0.19)cm]. For the 60% muscle site, there was no interaction (p = 0.57) and there was no main effect for condition (p = 0.83). However, there was a main effect for time (p < 0.001). Muscle size increased from pre to post intervention [mean change = 0.15 (0.09-0.19)cm]. For the 70% muscle site, there was no interaction (p = 0.64) and there was no main effect for condition (p = 0.32). However, there was a main effect for time (p < 0.001). Muscle size increased from pre to post intervention [mean change = 0.15 (0.09-0.20)cm]. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the current data would suggest that accounting for an individual’s baseline training volume does not seem to influence changes in muscle size or strength, as both conditions increased similarly over a 12-week training period.
Recommended Citation
Moreno, Enrique N.; Figueroa, Elias C.; Sampson, Danielle T.; and Buckner, Samuel L.
(2024)
"IS DOING MORE BETTER? THE IMPLICATIONS OF ACCOUNTING FOR BASELINE TRAINING VOLUME IN PREVIOUSLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS,"
International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings: Vol. 16:
Iss.
3, Article 77.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijesab/vol16/iss3/77