Compatibility of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training for Skeletal Muscle Size and Function: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background Both athletes and recreational exercisers often perform relatively high volumes of aerobic and strength training simultaneously. However, the compatibility of these two distinct training modes remains unclear. Objective This systematic review assessed the compatibility of concurrent aerobic and strength training compared with strength training alone, in terms of adaptations in muscle function (maximal and explosive strength) and muscle mass. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the influence of training modality, training type, exercise order, training frequency, age, and training status. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus were systematically searched (12 August 2020, updated on 15 March 2021). Eligibility criteria were as follows. Population: healthy adults of any sex and age; Intervention: supervised concurrent aerobic and strength training for at least 4 weeks; Comparison: identical strength training prescription, with no aerobic training; Outcome: maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscle hypertrophy. Results A total of 43 studies were included. The estimated standardised mean differences (SMD) based on the random-effects model were − 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] − 0.20 to 0.09; p = 0.446), − 0.28 (95% CI − 0.48 to − 0.08; p = 0.007), and − 0.01 (95% CI − 0.16 to 0.18; p = 0.919) for maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscle hypertrophy, respectively. Attenuation of explosive strength was more pronounced when concurrent training was performed within the same session (p = 0.043) than when sessions were separated by at least 3 h (p > 0.05). No significant effects were found for the other moderators, i.e. type of aerobic training (cycling vs. running), frequency of concurrent training (> 5 vs. < 5 weekly sessions), training status (untrained vs. active), and mean age (< 40 vs. > 40 years). Conclusion Concurrent aerobic and strength training does not compromise muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength development. However, explosive strength gains may be attenuated, especially when aerobic and strength training are performed in the same session. These results appeared to be independent of the type of aerobic training, frequency of concurrent training, training status, and age. PROSPERO: CRD42020203777.

Download Full-text

An updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the compatibility of concurrent aerobic and strength training for skeletal muscle size and function

10.31236/osf.io/e7tvr ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Moritz Schumann ◽

Joshua F Feuerbacher ◽

Marvin Sünkeler ◽

Nils Freitag ◽

Bent Rønnestad ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Strength Training ◽

Muscle Hypertrophy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Muscle Size ◽

Concurrent Training ◽

Strength Development ◽

Maximal Strength ◽

Explosive Strength ◽

The Impact

ObjectiveThis systematic review assessed the compatibility of concurrent aerobic and strength training compared to sole strength training regarding adaptations in muscle function (maximal and explosive strength) and muscle mass. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the impact of training modality, exercise type, exercise order, training frequency, age, and training status.DesignA systematic literature search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). PROSPERO: CRD42020203777Data sourcesPubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Scopus were systematically searched (12th of August 2020, updated on the 15th of March 2021).Eligibility criteriaPopulation: Healthy adults of any sex and age; Intervention: Supervised, concurrent aerobic and strength training of at least 4 weeks; Comparison: Sole strength training with matched strength training volume; Outcome: maximal strength, explosive strength and muscle hypertrophy. ResultsA total of 43 studies were included. The estimated average standardised mean differences (SMD) based on the random-effects model were -0.06 (95% CI: -0.20, 0.09, p=0.446), -0.28 (95% CI: -0.48, - 0.08, p=0.007) and -0.01 (95% CI: -0.16, 0.18, p=0.919) for maximal strength, explosive strength and muscle hypertrophy, respectively. The attenuation in explosive strength was more pronounced when concurrent training was performed within the same session (p=0.043) compared with separating the sessions by at least 3 h (p>0.05). Summary/ConclusionConcurrent aerobic and strength training does not compromise muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength development. However, explosive strength gains may be attenuated, especially when aerobic and strength training are performed within the same session.

Download Full-text

Effects of Concurrent Training on 1RM and VO2 in Adults: Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

International Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1055/a-1506-3007 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Pedro Gabriel Pito ◽

Jefferson R. Cardoso ◽

James Tufano ◽

Débora Guariglia

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Oxygen Consumption ◽

Strength Training ◽

Aerobic Training ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lower Limbs ◽

Peak Oxygen Consumption ◽

Concurrent Training ◽

Strength Development ◽

Randomized Controlled

AbstractThe purpose of this systematic review was to analyze the effects of concurrent training on one repetition maximum (1RM), maximum oxygen consumption (VO2max), and peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) in healthy adults. The review followed PRISMA recommendations using randomized controlled trials in nine databases. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, totaling a sample of 796 subjects to perform the meta-analysis. As result, concurrent training provides similar increases in 1RM as strength training for upper limbs (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.12; 95% IC: [−0.18; 0.41]; p=0.43) and for the lower limbs (SMD: −0.32; 95% IC: [−0.79; 0.15]; p=0.19). Similarly, no difference was found in the aerobic capacity between the concurrent training vs. aerobic training groups ([SMD – VO2max]: −0.19; 95% IC: [−0.71; 0.33]; p=0.48 and [SMD – VO2peak]: −0.24; 95% IC: [−0.57; 0.08]; p=0.14). Based on the results found, we can affirm that a) similar to strength training, concurrent training provides maximum strength development for upper and lower limbs; and b) cardiorespiratory capacity is not impaired by concurrent training in relation to aerobic training, demonstrating the compatibility of the two training sessions.

Download Full-text

Developing maximal strength for combat sports athletes

Revista de Artes Marciales Asiáticas ◽

10.18002/rama.v16i1s.7002 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1s) ◽

pp. 86

Author(s):

Braulio Henrique Magnani Branco ◽

Emerson Franchini

Keyword(s):

Strength Training ◽

Longitudinal Studies ◽

Muscle Hypertrophy ◽

Scientific Evidence ◽

Maximum Strength ◽

Strength Development ◽

Combat Sports ◽

Maximal Strength ◽

Historical Aspects ◽

Strength Tests

<p>This chapter deals with historical aspects of strength training, contextualizing the relevance of strength training for combat sports to maximize the performance of grapplers, strikers, and mixed martial artists. Scientific articles were listed that presented data related to maximum strength in the leading research databases. Scientific evidence presented in official and simulated matches, and official competitions are presented. Likewise, longitudinal studies on the development of maximal strength in combat sports athletes, maximal strength tests for combat sports athletes (dynamic, isometric, and isokinetic tests), and reference for maximal strength (dynamic and isometric exercises) values in several exercises, as well as normative tables are presented. Another point approached was training prescription for muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength development (dynamic and isometric) for combat sports athletes.</p>

Download Full-text

Efectos del entrenamiento de sobrecarga tradicional vs CrossFit sobre distintas expresiones de la fuerza (Effects of traditional strength training vs CrossFit on different expressions of strength)

Retos ◽

10.47197/retos.v42i0.86132 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 42 ◽

pp. 182-188

Author(s):

Facundo Costa ◽

Andrés Santiago Parodi Feye ◽

Carlos Magallanes

Keyword(s):

Strength Training ◽

Bench Press ◽

Sport Performance ◽

Strength Development ◽

Maximal Strength ◽

Training Experience ◽

Squat Jump ◽

Explosive Strength ◽

Back Squat ◽

Endurance Strength

El desarrollo de la fuerza es relevante tanto para el rendimiento como para la salud. El propósito del presente estudio fue determinar los efectos del CrossFit en comparación con entrenamiento tradicional sobre distintas manifestaciones de la fuerza. Catorce adultos entrenados de ambos sexos fueron divididos aleatoriamente en dos grupos para realizar 8 semanas de entrenamiento: un grupo (CF; edad: 24.9 ± 1.6 años) realizó CrossFit y el otro grupo (ET; edad: 28.7 ± 4.6 años) realizó entrenamiento de fuerza tradicional. La carga de ambos fue equiparada con relación a la duración de la parte central de las sesiones. Todos los sujetos fueron evaluados con tests de fuerza máxima (Back Squat, Bench Press y Dead Lift), fuerza resistencia (Squat y Push-ups) y fuerza explosiva (Squat Jump y Abalakov) pre y post intervención. Se verificaron mejoras en ambos grupos en todas las variables analizadas (p < 0,05), pero no se hallaron diferencias entre grupos como consecuencia de los distintos programas de entrenamiento. Se concluye que ambos programas de entrenamiento son similarmente efectivas para desarrollar la fuerza máxima, la fuerza explosiva y la fuerza resistencia en adultos entrenados. Abstract: Muscular strength development in its different expressions forms is relevant for both sport performance and health. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effects of CrossFit training in comparison with traditional resistance training on different expressions of strength. Fourteen adults of both sexes, with strength training experience, were randomly divided into two groups to perform 8 weeks of training: one group (CF; age: 24.9 ± 1.6yrs) performed CrossFit and the other group (ET; age: 28.7 ± 4.6yrs) performed traditional strength training. The training load of both programs was equated in relation to the duration of the main part of the sessions. All subjects were tested for maximal strength (Back Squat, Bench Press and Dead Lift), endurance strength (Squat and Push-ups) and explosive strength (Squat Jump and Abalakov) before and after the intervention. Significant improvements were verified in both groups post intervention for all the variables analyzed (p <0.05), but no significant differences were found between groups as a consequence of the different training programs. It is concluded that both training modalities are similarly effective in developing maximal strength, explosive strength and endurance strength in trained adults.

Download Full-text