Botton Cíntia E, Radaelli Regis, Wilhelm Eurico N, Rech Anderson, Brown Lee E, Pinto Ronei S
1Exercise Research Laboratory, Physical Education School, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; and 2Center for Sport Performance, Human Performance Laboratory, California State University, Fullerton, California.
J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Jul;30(7):1924-32. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001125.
Botton, CE, Radaelli, R, Wilhelm, EN, Rech, A, Brown, LE, and Pinto, RS. Neuromuscular adaptations to unilateral vs. bilateral strength training in women. J Strength Cond Res 30(7): 1924-1932, 2016-Considering the bilateral deficit, the sum of forces produced by each limb in a unilateral condition is generally greater than that produced by them in a bilateral condition. Therefore, it can be speculated that performing unilateral strength exercises may allow greater training workloads and subsequently greater neuromuscular adaptations when compared with bilateral training. Hence, the purpose of this study was to compare neuromuscular adaptations with unilateral vs. bilateral training in the knee extensor muscles. Forty-three recreationally active young women were allocated to a control, unilateral (UG) or bilateral (BG) training group, which performed 2 times strength training sessions a week for 12 weeks. Knee extension one repetition maximum (1RM), maximal isometric strength, muscle electrical activity, and muscle thickness were obtained before and after the study period. Muscle strength was measured in unilateral (right + left) and bilateral tests. Both UG and BG increased similarly their unilateral 1RM (33.3 ± 14.3% vs. 24.6 ± 11.9%, respectively), bilateral 1RM (20.3 ± 6.8% vs. 28.5 ± 12.3%, respectively), and isometric strength (14.7 ± 11.3% vs. 13.1 ± 12.5%, respectively). The UG demonstrated greater unilateral isometric strength increase than the BG (21.4 ± 10.5% vs. 10.3 ± 11.1%, respectively) and only the UG increased muscle electrical activity. Muscle thickness increased similarly for both training groups. Neither group exhibited pretesting 1RM bilateral deficit values, but at post-testing, UG showed a significant bilateral deficit (-6.5 ± 7.8%) whereas BG showed a significant bilateral facilitation (5.9 ± 9.0%). Thus, performing unilateral or bilateral exercises was not a decisive factor for improving morphological adaptations and bilateral muscle strength in untrained women. Unilateral training, however, potentiate unilateral specific strength gains.
博顿,CE、拉代利,R、威廉,EN、雷赫,A、布朗,LE和平托,RS。女性单侧与双侧力量训练的神经肌肉适应性。《力量与体能研究杂志》30(7): 1924 - 1932,2016年——考虑到双侧缺陷,在单侧条件下每个肢体产生的力量总和通常大于双侧条件下它们产生的力量总和。因此,可以推测与双侧训练相比,进行单侧力量训练可能允许更大的训练负荷,并随后产生更大的神经肌肉适应性。因此,本研究的目的是比较膝关节伸肌单侧与双侧训练的神经肌肉适应性。43名有运动习惯的年轻女性被分配到对照组、单侧训练组(UG)或双侧训练组(BG),她们每周进行2次力量训练课程,共12周。在研究期前后获取膝关节伸展一次重复最大值(1RM)、最大等长力量、肌肉电活动和肌肉厚度。在单侧(右 + 左)和双侧测试中测量肌肉力量。UG组和BG组单侧1RM(分别为33.3±14.3%和24.6±11.9%)、双侧1RM(分别为20.3±6.8%和28.5±12.3%)以及等长力量(分别为14.7±11.3%和13.1±12.5%)的增加相似。UG组单侧等长力量的增加大于BG组(分别为21.4±10.5%和10.3±11.1%),并且只有UG组增加了肌肉电活动。两个训练组的肌肉厚度增加相似。两组在测试前均未表现出1RM双侧缺陷值,但在测试后,UG组出现显著的双侧缺陷(-6.5±7.8%),而BG组出现显著的双侧促进(5.9±9.0%)。因此,进行单侧或双侧练习不是未训练女性改善形态适应性和双侧肌肉力量的决定性因素。然而,单侧训练增强了单侧特定力量的增加。