Myraunet Per Aslak, Saeterbakken Atle Hole, Andersen Vidar
Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway.
Front Sports Act Living. 2025 Jan 17;7:1536747. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2025.1536747. eCollection 2025.
The aim of this study was to compare the perceptive responses, physiological measures, training volume and training duration comparing a superset vs. a traditional resistance training session in untrained adults. Thirty adults (29 ± 7 years, 1.72 ± 0.1 m, 77 ± 16 kg) performed one superset resistance training session and one traditional resistance training session in a randomized-crossover design. Both sessions consisted of eight exercises with two sets and a load of ∼10-repetition maximum. The outcomes included number of repetitions, training duration, blood lactate and heart rate in addition to rate of perceived exertion (RPE), rate of perceived discomfort (RPD), session displeasure/pleasure (sPDF) and exercise enjoyment (EES) which were recorded in the middle and post-exercise. Forty-eight hours after the last session the participants reported which session they would prefer as their regular routine if they had to choose. The main findings were that the superset session led to greater RPE compared to the traditional session ( = 0.012-0.16, = 0.53-0.54). Further, there was a trend towards greater RPD after the superset session, although not reaching statistical significance ( = 0.092, = 0.41). There were no differences for sPDF ( = 0.404) or EES ( = 0.829). Furthermore, the superset session demonstrated higher levels of blood lactate levels (18.3%. < 0.001, = 0.81) and average heart rate (7.8%, < 0.001, = 1.53) compared to the traditional session. The traditional session took 60% longer time ( < 0.001, = 6.62), and had 4.6% more repetitions ( = 0.006, = 0.54) compared to the superset session. Two out of three participants reported the superset session as their preferred regular training routine. In conclusion, the superset session led to a higher perceived effort and discomfort, higher metabolic stress, took less time, had a lower training volume and was more preferred compared to the traditional session in untrained adults.
本研究的目的是比较无训练经验的成年人进行超级组训练与传统抗阻训练时的感知反应、生理指标、训练量和训练时长。30名成年人(年龄29±7岁,身高1.72±0.1米,体重77±16千克)采用随机交叉设计进行了一次超级组抗阻训练和一次传统抗阻训练。两次训练均包含8个练习动作,各进行两组,负荷为约10次重复最大值。结果指标包括重复次数、训练时长、血乳酸和心率,以及在训练中和训练后记录的主观用力感觉率(RPE)、主观不适率(RPD)、训练满意度/愉悦度(sPDF)和运动愉悦感(EES)。在最后一次训练48小时后,参与者报告如果必须选择,他们更倾向于将哪次训练作为常规训练。主要研究结果表明,与传统训练相比,超级组训练导致更高的RPE(效应量=0.012 - 0.16,p值=0.53 - 0.54)。此外,超级组训练后有RPD更高的趋势,尽管未达到统计学显著性(效应量=0.092,p值=0.41)。sPDF(效应量=0.404)或EES(效应量=0.829)没有差异。此外,与传统训练相比,超级组训练表现出更高的血乳酸水平(18.3%,p<0.001,效应量=0.81)和平均心率(7.8%,p<0.001,效应量=1.53)。与超级组训练相比,传统训练耗时多60%(p<0.001,效应量=6.62),重复次数多4.6%(效应量=0.006,p值=0.54)。三分之二的参与者报告超级组训练是他们更倾向的常规训练。总之,与传统训练相比,超级组训练在无训练经验的成年人中导致更高的主观用力和不适、更高的代谢压力,耗时更少,训练量更低,且更受欢迎。