Benavente Cristina, Feriche Belén
Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
J Sports Sci. 2024 Nov 17:1-10. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2024.2425536.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted focused on the impact of specific methodological prescription variables in resistance training (R) programming on muscle strength under hypoxic conditions. Searches of Pubmed-Medline, Web of Science, Sport Discuss and the Cochrane Library compared the effect of R on strength development under hypoxic (RTH) vs. normoxic (RTN) conditions through the 1-repetition maximum (1RM) test. Apart from the overall meta-analysis, several R methodological prescription variables available in the included studies (set end point, total weekly training volume, type of exercise, region of the body measured or type of routine) were analysed. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall analyses showed trivial differences in 1RM favouring RTH over RTN (SMD = 0.18 [CI: 0.04; 0.31]; = 0.030). Sub-analyses revealed that a R programme of a non-full-body routine, including 9 or more sets per exercise/week of multi-joint exercises performed to non-failure, favoured RTH for enhancing 1RM ( < 0.10). In conclusion, the evidence ratified a trivial benefit of RTH over RTN for muscle strength gains after a R period. However, the handling of specific R methodological prescription variables can slightly improve strength development outcomes in hypoxia.
进行了一项系统综述和荟萃分析,重点关注抗阻训练(R)方案中特定方法学处方变量对低氧条件下肌肉力量的影响。通过检索PubMed-Medline、科学网、体育讨论数据库和考克兰图书馆,通过1次重复最大值(1RM)测试比较了低氧(RTH)与常氧(RTN)条件下抗阻训练对力量发展的影响。除了总体荟萃分析外,还分析了纳入研究中可用的几个抗阻训练方法学处方变量(组终点、每周总训练量、运动类型、测量身体部位或训练常规类型)。13项研究符合纳入标准。总体分析显示,1RM方面差异不显著,低氧抗阻训练比常氧抗阻训练更具优势(标准化均值差=0.18[置信区间:0.04;0.31];P=0.030)。亚组分析显示,非全身训练常规的抗阻训练方案,包括每周每项运动进行9组或更多组多关节运动直至未达到疲劳,在增强1RM方面低氧抗阻训练更具优势(P<0.10)。总之,证据证实了在抗阻训练期后,低氧抗阻训练在增加肌肉力量方面比常氧抗阻训练有微小益处。然而,处理特定的抗阻训练方法学处方变量可在低氧环境下略微改善力量发展结果。