These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The velocity of resistance exercise does not accurately assess repetitions-in-reserve.
    Author: Mansfield SK, Peiffer JJ, Galna B, Scott BR.
    Journal: Eur J Sport Sci; 2023 Dec; 23(12):2357-2367. PubMed ID: 37552530.
    Abstract:
    This study assessed the reliability of mean concentric bar velocity from 3- to 0-repetitions in reserve (RIR) across four sets in different exercises (bench press and prone row) and with different loads (60 and 80% 1-repetition maximum; 1RM). Whether velocity values from set one could be used to predict RIR in subsequent sets was also examined. Twenty recreationally active males performed baseline 1RM testing before two randomised sessions of four sets to failure with 60 or 80% 1RM. A linear position transducer measured mean concentric velocity of repetitions, and the velocity associated with each RIR value up to 0-RIR. For both exercises, velocity decreased between each repetition from 3- to 0-RIR (p ≤ 0.010). Mean concentric velocity of RIR values was not reliable across sets in the bench press (mean intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.40, mean coefficient of variation [CV] = 21.3%), despite no significant between-set differences (p = 0.530). Better reliability was noted in the prone row (mean ICC = 0.80, mean CV = 6.1%), but velocity declined by 0.019-0.027 m·s-1 (p = 0.032) between sets. Mean concentric velocity was 0.050-0.058 m·s-1 faster in both exercises with 60% than 80% 1RM with (p < 0.001). At the individual level, the velocity of specific RIR values from set one accurately predicted RIR from 5- to 0-RIR for 30.9% of repetitions in subsequent sets. These findings suggest that velocity of specific RIR values vary across exercises, loads and sets. As velocity-based RIR estimates were not accurate for 69.1% of repetitions, alternative methods to should be considered for autoregulating of resistance exercise in recreationally active individuals. Bar velocity of bench press and prone row repetitions decreases on average from 3- to 0-repetitions in reserve (RIR) and is faster for lighter versus heavier loadsThe velocity of 3- to 0-RIR varied across four sets for the prone row but was more reliable for the prone row than the bench pressAt the individual participant level, there was not a consistent decrease in velocity between consecutive repetitions, and target velocities for specific RIR values were not correctly predicted in most cases.Using velocity stops may not be an appropriate method to predict specific RIR in recreationally active individuals.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]