Effects of Variations in Resistance Training Frequency on Strength Development in Well-Trained Populations and Implications for In-Season Athlete Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract

Background In-season competition and tournaments for team sports can be both long and congested, with some sports competing up to three times per week. During these periods of time, athletes need to prepare technically, tactically and physically for the next fixture and the short duration between fixtures means that, in some cases, physical preparation ceases, or training focus moves to recovery as opposed to progressing adaptations. Objective The aim of this review was to investigate the effect of training frequency on muscular strength to determine if a potential method to accommodate in-season resistance training, during busy training schedules, could be achieved by utilizing shorter more frequent training sessions across a training week. Methods A literature search was conducted using the SPORTDiscus, Ovid, PubMed and Scopus databases. 2134 studies were identified prior to application of the following inclusion criteria: (1) maximal strength was assessed, (2) a minimum of two different training frequency groups were included, (3) participants were well trained, and finally (4) compound exercises were included within the training programmes. A Cochrane risk of bias assessment was applied to studies that performed randomized controlled trials and consistency of studies was analysed using I2 as a test of heterogeneity. Secondary analysis of studies included Hedges’ g effect sizes (g) and between-study differences were estimated using a random-effects model. Results Inconsistency of effects between pre- and post-intervention was low within-group (I2 = 0%), and moderate between-group (I2 ≤ 73.95%). Risk of bias was also low based upon the Cochrane risk of bias assessment. Significant increases were observed overall for both upper (p ≤ 0.022) and lower (p ≤ 0.008) body strength, pre- to post-intervention, when all frequencies were assessed. A small effect was observed between training frequencies for upper (g ≤ 0.58) and lower body (g ≤ 0.45). Conclusion Over a 6–12-week period, there are no clear differences in maximal strength development between training frequencies, in well-trained populations. Such observations may permit the potential for training to be manipulated around competition schedules and volume to be distributed across shorter, but more frequent training sessions within a micro-cycle rather than being condensed into 1–2 sessions per week, in effect, allowing for a micro-dosing of the strength stimuli.

In-Season Training Model for National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics Female Basketball Players Using “Microdosed” Programming

“…MD is borrowed from the field of pharmaceuticals and is defined as “the subpharmacological administration of an investigational drug” (63). When applied to strength and conditioning and sports performance, Cuthbert et al (31) defined MD as “the division of total volume within a microcycle, across frequent, short duration, repeated bouts.” The use of MD as a programming methodology was first referenced in the literature in 2015 by Kilen et al (60), with their experimental subjects referred to as a “microtraining” group. MD training sessions are recommended to be no longer than 20–30 minutes in length (56,60).…”

“…The initial recommendations for in-season training were centered on individual sport athletes (such as tennis, triathlon, and sprinting) with short seasons and a goal of maintaining strength and physical fitness characteristics (31,88). However, as an NAIA basketball season may last up to 6 months or longer, this approach may not be appropriate because it would leave little time during the annual plan for physical development.…”

Exploratory Analysis of Sprint Force-Velocity Characteristics, Kinematics and Performance across a Periodized Training Year: A Case Study of Two National Level Sprint Athletes

“…Undulating periodization provides more frequent changes to stimuli (i.e., volume, intensity) which have been reported to be more conducive to optimize gains in strength [ 20 ]. During the COMP phase, this approach to periodization has been implemented to provide a micro-dosing effect to training prior to reducing the training load ahead of a competition [ 21 ].…”

The effect of volume equated 1- versus 2-day formats of Nordic hamstring exercise training on fitness in youth soccer players: A randomised controlled trial

“…However, it is also interesting to note that of the 22 studies included in the aforementioned review [ 13 ], only one [ 14 ] was conducted in the young target population for our investigation. Similarly, a meta-analysis by Cuthbert et al [ 15 ] revealed no significant differences in strength when well-trained populations were exposed to volume-equated RT programmes of different weekly frequencies. The authors concluded that RT could be structured in short, more frequent sessions that could be programmed around the competitive schedule but, again, none of the included studies were conducted in a youth population.…”