Nutritional Considerations for Concurrent Training

Author(s):  
Timothy Etheridge ◽  
Philip J. Atherton
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 991-1010
Author(s):  
Henrik Petré ◽  
Erik Hemmingsson ◽  
Hans Rosdahl ◽  
Niklas Psilander

Abstract Background The effect of concurrent training on the development of maximal strength is unclear, especially in individuals with different training statuses. Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to compare the effect of concurrent resistance and endurance training with that of resistance training only on the development of maximal dynamic strength in untrained, moderately trained, and trained individuals. Methods On the basis of the predetermined criteria, 27 studies that compared effects between concurrent and resistance training only on lower-body 1-repetition maximum (1RM) strength were included. The effect size (ES), calculated as the standardised difference in mean, was extracted from each study, pooled, and analysed with a random-effects model. Results The 1RM for leg press and squat exercises was negatively affected by concurrent training in trained individuals (ES =  – 0.35, p < 0.01), but not in moderately trained ( – 0.20, p = 0.08) or untrained individuals (ES = 0.03, p = 0.87) as compared to resistance training only. A subgroup analysis revealed that the negative effect observed in trained individuals occurred only when resistance and endurance training were conducted within the same training session (ES same session =  – 0.66, p < 0.01 vs. ES different sessions =  – 0.10, p = 0.55). Conclusion This study demonstrated the novel and quantifiable effects of training status on lower-body strength development and shows that the addition of endurance training to a resistance training programme may have a negative impact on lower-body strength development in trained, but not in moderately trained or untrained individuals. This impairment seems to be more pronounced when training is performed within the same session than in different sessions. Trained individuals should therefore consider separating endurance from resistance training during periods where the development of dynamic maximal strength is prioritised.


2015 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 542
Author(s):  
Cristine L. Alberton ◽  
Rodrigo Ferrari ◽  
Eduardo L. Cadore ◽  
Stephanie S. Pinto ◽  
Ronei S. Pinto ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrián Varela-Sanz ◽  
José L. Tuimil ◽  
Laurinda Abreu ◽  
Daniel A. Boullosa

Author(s):  
Miguel Sánchez-Moreno ◽  
David Rodríguez-Rosell ◽  
David Díaz-Cueli ◽  
Fernando Pareja-Blanco ◽  
Juan José González-Badillo

Purpose: This study analyzed the effects of 3 training interventions: 1 isolated endurance training (ET) and 2 concurrent training (CT), which differed in the velocity loss (VL) magnitude allowed during the resistance training (RT) set: 15% (VL15) versus 45%, on strength and endurance running performance. Methods: A total of 33 resistance- and endurance-trained men were randomly allocated into 3 groups: VL15, VL 45%, and ET. ET was similar across all groups. The CT groups differed in the VL allowed during the RT set. Before and after the 8-week training program the following tests were performed: (1) running sprints, (2) vertical jump, (3) progressive loading test in the squat exercise, and (4) incremental treadmill running test up to maximal oxygen uptake. Results: Significant differences (P < .001) in RT volume (approximately 401 vs 177 total repetitions for VL 45% and VL15, respectively) were observed. Significant “group” × “time” interactions were observed for vertical jump and all strength-related variables: the CT groups attained significantly greater gains than ET. Moreover, a significant “group” × “time” interaction (P = .03) was noted for velocity at maximal oxygen uptake. Although all groups showed increases in velocity at maximal oxygen uptake, the VL15 group achieved greater gains than the ET group. Conclusions: CT interventions experienced greater strength gains than the ET group. Although all groups improved their endurance performance, the VL15 intervention resulted in greater gains than the ET approach. Therefore, moderate VL thresholds in RT performed during CT could be a good strategy for concurrently maximizing strength and endurance development.


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (14) ◽  
pp. 1573-1581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cleiton Augusto Libardi ◽  
Giovana Verginia Souza ◽  
Arthur Fernandes GÁspari ◽  
Claudinei Ferreira Dos Santos ◽  
Sabrina Toffoli Leite ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 146-157
Author(s):  
Abdolreza Kazemi ◽  
◽  
Sareh Mahalati ◽  

Aims: The present study investigated the effects of a 10-week concurrent training on the serum levels of vaspin and visfatin in overweight females. Methods & Materials: Twenty-four over-weight females from Kerman City, Iran (Mean±SD age: 11.23±0.62 years; Mean±SD weight: 64.83±2.70kg; Mean±SD BMI: 27.97±0.47 kg/m2) were randomly assigned into the control and concurrent training groups. The intervention group performed the training protocol as follows: endurance training: 65-85% of Vo2 max for 20 minutes per session, and resistance training: 50-60% of One Repetition Maximum (1RM) for 30 minutes per session and 3 days a week for 10 weeks. Fasting plasma vaspin, visfatin, and insulin levels were measured by ELISA method. To analyze the data, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was used. Findings: Performing 10 weeks of concurrent training significantly decreased vaspin and visfatin plasma levels, and insulin resistance resting levels (P≤0.05); however, there was no significant decrease in glucose levels. Conclusion: Concurrent training can decrease insulin resistance, probably by reducing vaspin and visfatin in overweight females. Therefore, it is suggested that overweight females use concurrent training to improve insulin sensitivity and prevent metabolic diseases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document