Blasimann A1, Abgottspon C1, Schwab C1
1Bern University of Applied Sciences, Department of Health Professions, Bern, Switzerland
Background: Resistance training plays an important role in activities of daily life, in the fields of prevention, rehabilitation and athletics. There are different methodological concepts of resistance training concerning how to efficiently gain strength. Usually, the concepts refer to intensity, number of repetitions or series, time of breaks and/or exercise frequency. However, the concepts do not apply to different movement velocities during the repetitions, “time under tension” of muscles, respectively.
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the relation between different movement velocities during resistance training and strength gain.
Methods: The databases PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro and SPORTDiscus were searched systematically from December 2017 until May 2018. Inclusion criteria were: studies working with healthy people, resistance training with slow or usual movement velocity as intervention for eight weeks or more, control group without exercises. Usually, resistance training uses a movement velocity of one second for each phase (concentric and eccentric). In contrast, training with low movement velocity was defined as muscles being under tension for at least three seconds for each phase. Two of the authors screened the references independently for inclusion according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. To assess quality, the PEDro scale, the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist and the Risk of Bias assessment tool from Cochrane Collaboration were used.
Results: From 391 references initially found, six studies with 179 patients (age range 18 - 77 years) could be included. The participants had no experience with resistance training, except in one study. In addition to the intervention groups (slow or usual movement velocities), three studies also had a control group without exercises. In the intervention groups with slow movement velocity, the maximum strength, 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) respectively, increased significantly. In five studies, the 1RM-values in intervention groups with usual movement velocity also increased significantly. However, there was no significant difference in strength gain between intervention groups using either slow or usual movement velocity.
Conclusion(s): The included studies showed a broad variety regarding study population, training protocols and the effect of resistance training with either slow or usual movement velocity. Furthermore, it is unclear, which factors potentially influence strength gain and how the results can be transferred into activities of daily life and the field of athletics. In conclusion, resistance training with slow movement velocity lead to a significant increase of the 1RM. Comparing strength gain, there is no advantage for either resistance training with usual or slow movement velocity. More research is needed to investigate the different influencing factors on strength gain and most efficient resistance training modalities, training parameters respectively.
Implications: This method for resistance training working with slow movement velocity, muscles being a longer time under tension respectively, has the advantage of lower health risks such as increased blood tension values or exercise-induced injuries. Therefore, this method of resistance training with slow movement velocity, may be feasible and easily used for untrained people, elderly patients or people suffering from cardiovascular problems.
Keywords: Resistance training, movement velocity, time under tension
Funding acknowledgements: This work was partly funded by the Bern University of Applied Sciences by providing working hours for A. Blasimann.
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the relation between different movement velocities during resistance training and strength gain.
Methods: The databases PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro and SPORTDiscus were searched systematically from December 2017 until May 2018. Inclusion criteria were: studies working with healthy people, resistance training with slow or usual movement velocity as intervention for eight weeks or more, control group without exercises. Usually, resistance training uses a movement velocity of one second for each phase (concentric and eccentric). In contrast, training with low movement velocity was defined as muscles being under tension for at least three seconds for each phase. Two of the authors screened the references independently for inclusion according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. To assess quality, the PEDro scale, the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist and the Risk of Bias assessment tool from Cochrane Collaboration were used.
Results: From 391 references initially found, six studies with 179 patients (age range 18 - 77 years) could be included. The participants had no experience with resistance training, except in one study. In addition to the intervention groups (slow or usual movement velocities), three studies also had a control group without exercises. In the intervention groups with slow movement velocity, the maximum strength, 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) respectively, increased significantly. In five studies, the 1RM-values in intervention groups with usual movement velocity also increased significantly. However, there was no significant difference in strength gain between intervention groups using either slow or usual movement velocity.
Conclusion(s): The included studies showed a broad variety regarding study population, training protocols and the effect of resistance training with either slow or usual movement velocity. Furthermore, it is unclear, which factors potentially influence strength gain and how the results can be transferred into activities of daily life and the field of athletics. In conclusion, resistance training with slow movement velocity lead to a significant increase of the 1RM. Comparing strength gain, there is no advantage for either resistance training with usual or slow movement velocity. More research is needed to investigate the different influencing factors on strength gain and most efficient resistance training modalities, training parameters respectively.
Implications: This method for resistance training working with slow movement velocity, muscles being a longer time under tension respectively, has the advantage of lower health risks such as increased blood tension values or exercise-induced injuries. Therefore, this method of resistance training with slow movement velocity, may be feasible and easily used for untrained people, elderly patients or people suffering from cardiovascular problems.
Keywords: Resistance training, movement velocity, time under tension
Funding acknowledgements: This work was partly funded by the Bern University of Applied Sciences by providing working hours for A. Blasimann.
Topic: Sport & sports injuries; Disability & rehabilitation; Musculoskeletal
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern (Switzerland)
Ethics committee: Ethics Committee of the Canton of Bern (Switzerland)
Reason not required: Ethics approval was not necessary for this type of scientific work (systematic review).
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
