Purpose: To conduct a systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis of the current literature as to the effects of interval training (IT) vs moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) on measures of body composition, both on a whole-body and regional level. Methods: We searched English-language papers on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and sportrxiv for the following inclusion criteria: (a) randomized controlled trials that directly compared IT vs MICT body composition using a validated measure in healthy children and adults; (b) training was carried out a minimum of once per week for at least four weeks; (c) published in a peer-reviewed English language journal or on a pre-print server. Results: The main model for fat mass effects revealed a trivial standardized point estimate with high precision for the interval estimate, with moderate heterogeneity (−0.016 (95%CI −0.07 to 0.04); I2 = 36%). The main model for fat-free mass (FFM) effects revealed a trivial standardized point estimate with high precision for the interval estimate, with negligible heterogeneity (−0.0004 (95%CI −0.05 to 0.05); I2 = 16%). The GRADE summary of findings suggested high certainty for both main model effects. Conclusions: Our findings provide compelling evidence that the pattern of intensity of effort and volume during endurance exercise (i.e., IT vs MICT) has minimal influence on longitudinal changes in fat mass and FFM, which are likely to minimal anyway. Trial registration number: This study was preregistered on the Open Science Framework.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in changes in muscle strength and muscle thickness (MT) of the plantar flexor muscles between traditional resistance training (RT) involving passive rest and RT combined with inter-set stretch in the calf raise exercise. Employing a within-subject design, 21 young, healthy men performed plantar flexion exercises twice per week in both a traditional RT (TRAD) format and combined with a 20-second inter-set stretch (STRETCH). One leg was randomly assigned to the TRAD condition and the contralateral leg performed the STRETCH condition throughout the 8-week study period. Dependent variables included MT of the lateral gastrocnemius (LG), medial gastrocnemius (MG) and the soleus (SOL), and isometric strength of the plantar flexors. Results indicated a potential beneficial hypertrophic effect of STRETCH compared to TRAD for the SOL [0.7 mm, CI90% = (0, 1.6)], while the LG had more ambiguous effects [0.4 mm (−0.4, 1.3)] and MG effects were equivocal [0 mm (−0.6, 0.7)]. In general, LG demonstrated greater standardized growth [z = 1.1 (1, 1.3)] as compared to MG [z = 0.3 (0.2, 0.5)] and SOL [z = 0.3 (0.2, 0.5)]. Measures of isometric strength showed a modest advantage to STRETCH. In conclusion, loaded inter-set stretch may enhance MT of the soleus but effects on the gastrocnemii appear uncertain or unlikely in untrained men; plantar flexor strength appears to be modestly enhanced by the interventional strategy.

The purpose of this study was to improve our understanding of the relative contributions of biomechanical, anthropometric, and psychological factors in explaining maximal bench press (BP) strength in a heterogeneous, resistance-trained sample. Eighteen college-aged participants reported to the laboratory for three visits. The first visit consisted of psychometric testing. The second visit assessed participants’ anthropometrics, additional psychometric outcomes, and bench press one repetition maximum (1RM). Participants performed isometric dynamometry testing for horizontal shoulder adduction and elbow extension at a predicted sticking point joint position. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationships between the biomechanical, anthropometric, and psychological variables and BP 1RM. Our primary multiple linear regression accounted for 43% of the variance in BP strength (F(3,14) = 5.34, p = 0.01; R² = 0.53; adjusted R² = 0.43). The sum of peak isometric net joint moments from the shoulder and elbow had the greatest standardized effect (0.59), followed by lean body mass (0.27) and self-efficacy (0.17). The variance in BP 1RM can be similarly captured (R2 = 0.48) by a single principal component containing anthropometric, biomechanics, and psychological variables. Pearson correlations with BP strength were generally greater among anthropometric and biomechanical variables as compared to psychological variables. These data suggest that BP strength among a heterogeneous, resistance-trained population is explained by multiple factors and is more strongly associated with physical than psychological variables.

Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis of the current literature as to the effects of interval training (IT) vs moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) on measures of body composition, both on a whole-body and regional level. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: English-language searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINAHL conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: a) randomized controlled trials that directly compared IT vs MICT body composition using a validated measure in healthy children and adults; b) training was carried out a minimum of once per week for at least four weeks; c) published in a peer-reviewed English language journal or on a pre-print server. Results: The main model for fat mass effects revealed a trivial standardized point estimate with high precision for the interval estimate, with negligible heterogeneity. The main model for lean mass effects revealed a trivial standardized point estimate with high precision for the interval estimate, with negligible heterogeneity. The GRADE summary of findings suggested high certainty for both main model effects. In comparison to non-intervention control groups, the IT conditions resulted in small reductions in fat mass and trivial increases in lean mass. The MICT conditions also produced small reductions in fat mass, and trivial increases in lean mass. Analysis of regional fat loss revealed trivial between group comparative treatment effects for upper body, lower body and trunk regions with minimal differences between regions. Conclusion: Our findings provide compelling evidence that the intensity of effort during endurance exercise has minimal influence on longitudinal changes in fat mass and lean mass.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of electromagnetic resistance alone, as well as in combination with variable resistance or accentuated eccentric methods, with traditional dynamic constant external resistance exercise on myoelectric activity during elbow flexion. The study employed a within-participant randomized, cross-over design whereby 16 young, resistance-trained male and female volunteers performed elbow flexion exercise under each of the following conditions: using a dumbbell (DB); using a commercial electromagnetic resistance device (ELECTRO); variable resistance (VR) using a setting on the device that attempts to match the level of resistance to the human strength curve, and; eccentric overload (EO) using a setting on the device that increases the load by 50% on the eccentric portion of each repetition. Surface electromyography (sEMG) was obtained for the biceps brachii, brachioradialis and anterior deltoid on each of the conditions. Participants performed the conditions at their predetermined 10 repetition maximum. " The order of performance for the conditions was counterbalanced, with trials separated by a 10-min recovery period. The sEMG was synced to a motion capture system to assess sEMG amplitude at elbow joint angles of 30°, 50°, 70°, 90°, 110°, with amplitude normalized to the maximal activation. The anterior deltoid showed the largest differences in amplitude between conditions, where median estimates indicated greater concentric sEMG amplitude (~ 7–10%) with EO, ELECTRO and VR compared with DB. Concentric biceps brachii sEMG amplitude was similar between conditions. In contrast, results indicated a greater eccentric amplitude with DB compared to ELECTRO and VR, but unlikely to exceed a 5% difference. Data indicated a greater concentric and eccentric brachioradialis sEMG amplitude with DB compared to all other conditions, but differences were unlikely to exceed 5%. The electromagnetic device tended to produce greater amplitudes in the anterior deltoid, while DB tended to produce greater amplitudes in the brachioradialis; amplitude for the biceps brachii was relatively similar between conditions. Overall, any observed differences were relatively modest, equating to magnitudes of ~ 5% and not likely greater than 10%. These differences would seem to be of minimal practical significance.