King Grub
2017-12-04, 13:55
Objectives
Our goal was to systematically review the current literature and interpret the findings regarding the effects of periodized (PER) versus non-periodized (NP) resistance training programs aimed at muscular hypertrophy.
News
Controversy exists as to whether a (PER) approach to resistance training is superior to a (NP) approach for maximizing muscular hypertrophy, or vice-versa, or if no differences exist between the approaches.
Prospect and projects
Following a search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases, 12 studies comprising a total of 31 treatment groups met predetermined inclusion criteria.
Conclusion
Based on the results of our review, we conclude that similar hypertrophic effects may be achieved using either a PER or a NP approach. Importantly, the findings are specific to short-term training interventions, as the average duration of programs across studies amounted to ∼15 weeks; and to untrained individuals, as only two studies involved resistance-trained participants. A limitation of the reviewed literature also pertains to the small number of studies (n = 3) using direct measures of hypertrophy (i.e., magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound). Further research is needed to fill in the gaps in the current literature.
Should resistance training programs aimed at muscular hypertrophy be periodized? A systematic review of periodized versus non-periodized approaches. Science & Sports 26 November 2017.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0765159717302137
Our goal was to systematically review the current literature and interpret the findings regarding the effects of periodized (PER) versus non-periodized (NP) resistance training programs aimed at muscular hypertrophy.
News
Controversy exists as to whether a (PER) approach to resistance training is superior to a (NP) approach for maximizing muscular hypertrophy, or vice-versa, or if no differences exist between the approaches.
Prospect and projects
Following a search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases, 12 studies comprising a total of 31 treatment groups met predetermined inclusion criteria.
Conclusion
Based on the results of our review, we conclude that similar hypertrophic effects may be achieved using either a PER or a NP approach. Importantly, the findings are specific to short-term training interventions, as the average duration of programs across studies amounted to ∼15 weeks; and to untrained individuals, as only two studies involved resistance-trained participants. A limitation of the reviewed literature also pertains to the small number of studies (n = 3) using direct measures of hypertrophy (i.e., magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound). Further research is needed to fill in the gaps in the current literature.
Should resistance training programs aimed at muscular hypertrophy be periodized? A systematic review of periodized versus non-periodized approaches. Science & Sports 26 November 2017.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0765159717302137