No abstract

Masters-level weightlifters diagnosed with cancer can return to training as a part of a successful treatment plan. Many older adults at higher risk for cancer participate in masters weightlifting meets worldwide. Resuming activities enjoyed before diagnosis is part of a return to normalcy for these athletes. This article recommends using autoregulation integrated with periodization principles to account for changes in the body due to surgery, side effects from masters cancer treatments, and age-related declines that affect masters athletes. Surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy require adjusting workouts from prediagnosis levels to insure a safe and successful recovery while athletes experience side effects from treatments. Autoregulation is recommended to help strength and conditioning specialists assist in daily exercise prescriptions for patients with cancer who experience good and bad days during months of treatment cycles. Resistance training is an evidence-based practice for a successful recovery, and existing literature provides a basis for recommendations found in this article to support program development for masters weightlifters returning to advanced resistance training.

Background: Blood flow restriction training (BFRT) uses occlusion during low-intensity resistance training (<50% of repetition maximum, 1RM) to reduce arterial blood flow and venous return, imposing greater metabolic stress but similar muscular hypertrophy and strength gains as high-intensity resistance training (HIRT). However, no study, to date, has incorporated BFRT in a collegiate strength and conditioning setting to assess ecological validity. We aimed to investigate the effects of adding 6-weeks of accessory BFRT or HIRT to NCAA Division III soccer players prescribed resistance training regimen on muscle strength and hypertrophy. Methods: Male and female (n=17) athletes were randomly assigned to complete biceps curls 2x/week under BFRT or control (HIRT), following the regularly scheduled strength training. Bicep strength (1RM) and circumference (BC) were assessed at weeks 0, 3, and 6. Results: In men, no significant interaction between time and condition was observed for BC (p=0.861), though condition (BFRT vs Control, p=0.025) and time (p=0.024) were significant. For 1RM, there was no significant interaction between time and condition (BFRT vs HIRT, p=0.067) or of condition (p=0.598), but there was a significant effect of time (p=0.004). In women, there was no significant interaction between time and condition (p=0.765) or of condition (p=0.971) on BC, but time was significant (p=0.045). For 1RM, there was no significant interaction between time and condition (p=0.227) or of condition (p=0.741), but time was (p=0.018). Conclusion: BFRT induced similar increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy as HIRT in soccer players, suggesting that BFRT could be incorporated into collegiate athlete training.

No abstract