# Resistance Training for Hypertrophy - what the studies say!



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

I thought it might be an idea to compile some of the (limited) number of clinical studies which focus on manipulating select training variables and how muscle hypertrophy is affected. Before launching into the studies themselves however, firstly a few words of caution about using one of these studies to claim that a certain way of doing things has been shown to work, or that something else can't possibly work -

*Study Design*

Many of these studies use a design that includes a range of conditions which do not represent how 'real world' training takes place. Often the routines are not really routines and just focus on hypertrophy in a single exercised muscle, and often the routines are imbalanced compared to a realistic routine. The danger when using data from studies with unrealistic routines is that the actual response in a more complete routine with a differing magnitude of nutritional demands and physiological stresses may be very different.

*Participants*

Studies vary greatly in the characteristics of the participants. Things can differ from the range of previous training experience held by the participants, amount of pre-existing muscle mass, and pre-trial health and fitness levels. Where these factors vary within a single study and are not identified by the researchers, there may well be differences between groups that the overall average disguises.

Some studies also focus on a specific group such as only men, only women, or elderly individuals. Some studies control for and use specific groups only (i.e. a study on untrained young healthy women), others use a broader range of participants. This is all relevant because, as some of the studies will show, in some cases individuals of differing groups show responses that differ to those of other groups, and you can't always assume that what works for one group would work for another.

*The Results*

These studies usually show an overall average figure for hypertrophy but with a + and - range. This means that the given figure is an average, and that there was a degree of individual variability within the results. In some cases this may even mean that some individuals did not respond well at all whilst others responded exceptionally. Even where the average response is very high and looks good, i can still very much be the case that some individuals did everything properly and still didn't respond well due to some other factor.

*Comparing Similar Studies*

Sometimes you may wish to compare two studies - be careful. Different studies often measure the same things but in different ways. Some measure hypertrophy in muscle cross sectional area, some by scan, and some look at changes over muscle fiber types. These differences in measurements can make it tricky if you are looking to compare results from a study using one method to a different study using another method.

Likewise, as discussed above, studies using different exercise protocols or participants with differing characteristics cannot automatically all be assumed to respond equally.

*Abstract or Full Study?*

Although only pasting abstracts here, wherever possible I shall link to full studies. Where a full study is unavailable however, be careful about making assumptions based upon the abstract only, because often the abstract does not mention conditional factors, experimental limitations or caveats the researchers consider important but only mention in the discussion section of the full study.

*Publication Issues*

Some studies may be sponsored and therefore possibly contain some bias, some studies also may be outdated and use methods no longer considered accurate.

*The Studies*

*
*Ok, now the studies. I won't make any comments of my own, will leave the reader to make their own assessment of the info presented. Please note some of these studies may contradict each other. I shall also amend this list to include more studies that include measurements of muscle hypertrophy as they become available, and if anyone has a study they think it would be helpful to include, please link or C&P it in the thread.

*Training Frequency*

*
*

*
*



> *Comparison of 1 Day and 3 Days Per Week of Equal-Volume Resistance Training in Experienced Subjects*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...





> *Increasing lean mass and strength: A comparison of high frequency strength training to low frequency strength training*
> 
> 
> *Abstract:*Purpose: Determine the effect strength training frequency of equal volume has on improvements in lean mass and strength. Methods: Participants were 7 women and 12 men, age (x? = 34.64 years ± 6.91 years), training age (x? = 51.16 months ± 39.02 months). Participants were placed into one of two groups. High frequency training group (HFT) trained each muscle group 3 times per week. Low frequency training group (LFT) trained each muscle group one time per week. Results: HFT increased lean mass 1.06 kg ± 1.78 kg, (1.9%), LFT increased lean mass .99 kg ± 1.31 kg, (2.0%). HFT strength improvements on chest press 9.07 kg ± 6.33 kg, (11%) and hack squat 20.16 kg ± 11.59 kg, (21%). LFT strength improvements on chest press 5.80kg ± 4.26 kg, (7.0%) and hack squat 21.83 kg ± 11.17 kg, (24%). No mean differences between groups were significant. *Conclusion: HFT and LFT result in similar improvements in lean mass and strength, following 8 weeks of strength training.* Key Words: strength training frequency, exercise prescription, lean mass, hypertrophy.
> ...





> *Effect of Short-Term Equal-Volume Resistance Training With Different Workout Frequency on Muscle Mass and Strength in Untrained Men and Women*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Volume *



> *Effects of Single vs. Multiple Sets of Weight Training: Impact of Volume, Intensity, and Variation*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...





> *Influence of two different modes of resistance training in female subjects*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...





> *The Effect of Weight Training Volume on Hormonal Output and Muscular Size and Function*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Duration of Rest Between Sets*



> *Short Vs.Long Rest Period Between the Sets in Hypertrophic Resistance Training: Influence on Muscle Strength,Size, and Hormonal Adaptations in Trained Men*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Loading & Intensity*



> *Muscular Adaptations to Combinations of High- and Low-Intensity Resistance Exercises*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...





> *Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Methods of Periodization*



> *Comparison of Linear and Reverse Linear Periodization Effects on Maximal Strength and Body Composition*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*Split Routines vs Full Body Routines*



> *Comparison of Whole and Split Weight Training Routines in Young Women*
> 
> *
> *
> ...


*Sessions per Day*



> *Comparisons between twice-daily and once-daily training sessions in male weight lifters.*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Age & Gender*



> *Efficacy of 3 days/wk resistance training on myofiber hypertrophy and myogenic mechanisms in young vs. older adults*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


----------



## 36-26 (Jun 30, 2009)

Great post. It's interesting that 2 of the study's suggested that higher reps worked

better at building leg strength than lower reps but I'd imagine that's down to the fact

it was untrained women and newbies IIRC.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

36-26 said:



> Great post. It's interesting that 2 of the study's suggested that higher reps worked
> 
> better at building leg strength than lower reps but I'd imagine that's down to the fact
> 
> it was untrained women and newbies IIRC.


If I can find it again there's a study (focused on measuring strength outcome rather than hypertrophy) that determines higher rep training leads to concurrent increases in 1RM max for untrained women but not for untrained men - ie, where men perform higher rep training with squats their performance with the higher reps improves but their 1RM does not change to a very large degree at all, whereas for women their 1RM tends to increase to a much greater magnitude.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

Have decided I'll add new studies by pasting into new posts rather than by adding them to the original post to avoid them being missed.

A few new ones -

*Training Frequency*



> *Exercise dosing to retain resistance training adaptations in young and older adults.*
> 
> Abstract
> 
> ...


*Loading and Intensity*



> *Comparative effects of high- and low-intensity resistance training on thigh muscle strength, fiber area, and tissue composition in elderly women*
> 
> *
> *
> ...





> *Myogenic response of human skeletal muscle to 12 weeks of resistance training at light loading intensity*
> 
> There is strong evidence for enhanced numbers of satellite cells with heavy resistance training. The satellite cell response to very light muscle loading is, however, unknown. We, therefore, designed a 12-week training protocol where volunteers trained one leg with a high load (H) and the other leg with a light load (L). Twelve young healthy men [mean age 25 ± 3 standard deviation (SD) years] volunteered for the study. Muscle biopsies were collected from the m. vastus lateralis of both legs before and after the training period and satellite cells were visualized by CD56 immunohistochemistry. A significant main effect of time was observed (P<0.001) for the number of CD56+ cells per fiber (L: from 0.11 ± 0.02 to 0.13 ± 0.03; H: from 0.12 ± 0.03 to 0.15 ± 0.05, mean ± SD). The finding that 12 weeks of training skeletal muscle even with very light loads can induce an increase in the number of satellite cells reveals a new aspect of myogenic precursor cell activation and suggests that satellite cells may play a role in skeletal muscle adaptation over a broad physiological range.
> 
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01178.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false


----------



## arthuroarti (Nov 26, 2011)

dtlv said:


> I thought it might be an idea to compile some of the (limited) number of clinical studies which focus on manipulating select training variables and how muscle hypertrophy is affected. Before launching into the studies themselves however, firstly a few words of caution about using one of these studies to claim that a certain way of doing things has been shown to work, or that something else can't possibly work -
> 
> *Study Design*
> 
> ...


Most of these studies examine untrained subjects?


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

arthuroarti said:


> Most of these studies examine untrained subjects?


Yes, exactly... as I discussed in the first post, most of the studies that are available do not cover individuals with many months consecutive training behind them or are limited in other ways, so generalizing those results to more advanced trainees might not be an accurate way to go about things.

This thread is mostly simply for the purposes of a handy reference point for studies that compare training methods to hypertrophic response in some way, it is not here to make any points about how people from any particular demographic should train - it is up to the individual reading to make their own conclusions about the relevance of these studies.

I actually have some more studies to add which I'll do a bit later. Anyone else is welcome to add anything relevant too.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

*Loading and Intensity*



> *Low-Load Bench Press Training to Fatigue Results in Muscle Hypertrophy Similar to High-Load Bench Press Training*
> 
> *ABSTRACT*
> 
> ...





> *Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Periodization*



> *Comparison of muscle hypertrophy following 6-month of continuous and periodic strength training*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...





> *Muscular Adaptations to Combinations of High- and Low-Intensity Resistance Exercises*
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...


*Exercise Sequence*



> *Influence of Exercise Order on Maximum Strength and Muscle Volume in Nonlinear Periodized Resistance Training*
> 
> Abstract
> 
> ...


*Rest Intervals*



> *Comparison Between constant and decreasing rest intervals: influence on maximal strength and hypertrophy*
> 
> Abstract
> 
> ...


----------



## Hayesy (Aug 15, 2011)

Sticky this!


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

A few new studies to add to the list -

*Loading and Intensity*



> *Effects of different volume-equated resistance training loading strategies on muscular adaptations in well-trained men.*
> 
> AuthorsSchoenfeld BJ, et al. Show all Journal
> 
> ...


*Range of Motion*



> *Impact of range of motion during ecologically valid resistance training protocols on muscle size, subcutaneous fat, and strength.*
> 
> *
> *
> ...


*Program Design*



> *Effect of adding single-joint exercises to a multi-joint exercise resistance-training program on strength and hypertrophy in untrained subjects.*
> 
> Gentil P1, Soares SR, Pereira MC, Cunha RR, Martorelli SS, Martorelli AS, Bottaro M.
> 
> ...


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

About time I added a few more studies - one here, more to follow later.

*Rep Speed*



> *Effect of Repetition Duration During Resistance Training on Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis*
> 
> *
> *
> ...


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

A couple more to add:

*Training Frequency*



> *Influence of Resistance Training Frequency on Muscular Adaptations in Well-Trained Men.*
> 
> Schoenfeld, BJ, Ratamess, NA, Peterson, MD, Contreras, B, and Tiryaki-Sonmez, G. Influence of resistance training frequency on muscular adaptations in well-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 29(7): 1821-1829, 2015-
> 
> ...


*Rep Speed/TUT*



> *VARIATIONS IN REPETITION DURATION AND REPETITION NUMBERS INFLUENCES MUSCULAR ACTIVATION AND BLOOD LACTATE RESPONSE IN PROTOCOLS EQUALIZED BY TIME UNDER TENSION.*
> 
> Túlio de Lacerda, Lucas; Martins Costa, Hugo César; Ribeiro Diniz, Rodrigo César; Lima, Fernando Vitor; Pereira Andrade, André Gustavo; Tourino, Frank Douglas; Bemben, Michael G.; Chagas, Mauro Heleno
> 
> ...


----------



## Arc (Jan 17, 2013)

great findings.


----------

