19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Hypertrophic effects of concentric versus eccentric muscle actions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Controversy exists as to whether different dynamic muscle actions produce divergent hypertrophic responses. The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the hypertrophic effects of concentric versus eccentric training in healthy adults following regimented resistance training (RT). Studies were deemed eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: 1) were an experimental trial published in an English-language refereed journal; 2) directly compared concentric and eccentric actions without the use of external implements (i.e. blood pressure cuffs) and all other RT variables equivalent; 3) measured morphologic changes via biopsy, imaging (magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography, or ultrasound), bioelectrical impedance, and/or densitometry; 4) had a minimum duration of 6 weeks; and, 5) used human participants without musculoskeletal injury or any health condition that could directly, or through the medications associated with the management of said condition, be expected to impact the hypertrophic response to resistance exercise. A systematic literature search determined that 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Results showed that eccentric muscle actions resulted in a greater effect size (ES) compared to concentric actions, but results did not reach statistical significance (ES difference = 0.25 ± 0.13; CI95: -0.03, 0.52; P = 0.076). The mean percent change in muscle growth across studies favored eccentric compared to concentric actions (10.0% vs 6.8, respectively). The findings indicate the importance of including eccentric and concentric actions in a hypertrophy-oriented RT program as both have shown to be effective in increasing muscle hypertrophy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Fail-Safe N for Effect Size in Meta-Analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The effects of eccentric versus concentric resistance training on muscle strength and mass in healthy adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

            The aim of this systematic review was to determine if eccentric exercise is superior to concentric exercise in stimulating gains in muscle strength and mass. Meta-analyses were performed for comparisons between eccentric and concentric training as means to improve muscle strength and mass. In order to determine the importance of different parameters of training, subgroup analyses of intensity of exercise, velocity of movement and mode of contraction were also performed. Twenty randomised controlled trials studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed that when eccentric exercise was performed at higher intensities compared with concentric training, total strength and eccentric strength increased more significantly. However, compared with concentric training, strength gains after eccentric training appeared more specific in terms of velocity and mode of contraction. Eccentric training performed at high intensities was shown to be more effective in promoting increases in muscle mass measured as muscle girth. In addition, eccentric training also showed a trend towards increased muscle cross-sectional area measured with magnetic resonance imaging or computerised tomography. Subgroup analyses suggest that the superiority of eccentric training to increase muscle strength and mass appears to be related to the higher loads developed during eccentric contractions. The specialised neural pattern of eccentric actions possibly explains the high specificity of strength gains after eccentric training. Further research is required to investigate the underlying mechanisms of this specificity and its functional significance in terms of transferability of strength gains to more complex human movements.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Small sample adjustments for robust variance estimation with meta-regression.

              Although primary studies often report multiple outcomes, the covariances between these outcomes are rarely reported. This leads to difficulties when combining studies in a meta-analysis. This problem was recently addressed with the introduction of robust variance estimation. This new method enables the estimation of meta-regression models with dependent effect sizes, even when the dependence structure is unknown. Although robust variance estimation has been shown to perform well when the number of studies in the meta-analysis is large, previous simulation studies suggest that the associated tests often have Type I error rates that are much larger than nominal. In this article, I introduce 6 estimators with better small sample properties and study the effectiveness of these estimators via 2 simulation studies. The results of these simulations suggest that the best estimator involves correcting both the residuals and degrees of freedom used in the robust variance estimator. These studies also suggest that the degrees of freedom depend on not only the number of studies but also the type of covariates in the meta-regression. The fact that the degrees of freedom can be small, even when the number of studies is large, suggests that these small-sample corrections should be used more generally. I conclude with an example comparing the results of a meta-regression with robust variance estimation with the results from the corrected estimator.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Strength Cond Res
                Journal of strength and conditioning research
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                1533-4287
                1064-8011
                May 05 2017
                Affiliations
                [1 ] 1Department of Health Science, Lehman College, Bronx, NY, USA 2Total Rehabilitation and Sports Injuries Clinic, Winnipeg, MB, Canada\ 3Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA 4MRC-ARUK Centre of Excellence for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Derby, UK 5Weightology, LLC, Issaquah, WA, USA.
                Article
                10.1519/JSC.0000000000001983
                28486337
                0119de85-3550-4c13-bbc7-6f49c00fb82d
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article