To develop and evaluate the non-inferiority of the Autonomy and Perceptions Approach to Resistance Training (APART). With APART, participants choose their preferred loads and perform repetitions until they reach a specified rating of perceived effort (RPE) value, on a “0” (no effort) to “10” (maximal effort) RPE scale.
In this randomized controlled trial, 129 adults (18-45 years) with no RT experience were assigned to either APART or a standard RT group. Following baseline testing and familiarization, participants in both groups were required to complete three RT sessions per week for 12 weeks. Each session included three sets on six resistance training machines (three exercises for the upper body and three for the lower body). Under APART, trainees selected their preferred loads and completed as many repetitions as necessary to reach an RPE of 7, increasing to an RPE of 8 after six weeks. Under the standard approach, participants followed a fixed load protocol, starting at 65% of their one-repetition maximum (1RM), and performed 10 repetitions per set. Performance, health, subjective measures, and adherence were assessed at baseline, during, and after the intervention. Group differences were analyzed using confidence intervals and compared against a predefined non-inferiority margin.
101 participants completed the intervention, with similar adherence rates in both groups (69.5% in APART vs. 71.2% in the standard group). Both groups showed improvements in all performance outcomes, including 1RM, muscle endurance, and maximal isometric voluntary contraction, with negligible differences between groups. APART was confirmed to be non-inferior to the standard approach for performance measures. Additionally, both groups improved their health outcomes, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fat-free mass, waist circumference, fasting glucose, and blood lipid levels. However, negligible differences were measured in body weight or BMI. Non-inferiority could not be established for any of the health outcomes, potentially due to insufficient statistical power to detect such differences. Finally, participants in both groups reported positive experiences with the program (average > +40 on a -50 [negative] to +50 [positive] scale) with negligible differences between them.
APART demonstrated non-inferiority to the standard approach regarding performance outcomes. Although non-inferiority was not established for health outcomes, APART generally led to comparable improvements.
APART offers an alternative to standard RT prescriptions among young and non-clinical cohorts. Its emphasis on autonomy, personalization, and ease of use could also make it a valuable approach in rehabilitation settings. Future research should investigate its potential benefits in clinical populations.
Percieved effort
Exercise prescriptions
