Heavy vs. Light Load Single Joint Exercise Performance with Different Rest Periods

Research Review: Heavy vs. Light Load Single Joint Exercise Performance with Different Rest Periods

By David Boettcher MSc, BA, NASM CPT, PES, CES & NPTI

Edited by Brent Brookbush DPT, PT, COMT, MS, PES, CES, CSCS, ACSM H/FS

Original Citation:

Senna, G.W., Rodrigues, B.M., Sandy, Scudese, Bianco, A, & Dantas, E.H.M. (2017). Heavy vs light load single-joint exercise performance with different intervals. Journal of Human Kinetics, 58, 197-206. - ABSTRACT

Introduction:

Variables such as load, volume and inter-set rest periods can be manipulated within an exercise program to increase muscular strength, hypertrophy and endurance capacity. Inter-set rest periods between 1 - 5 minutes have been recommended depending on load, volume, velocity of movement, intended performance gain, number of joints involved, and training experience (1-17). This 2017 study compared the effects of two training loads and three inter-set rest periods on repetitions completed (workload volume) during a single-joint exercise in resistance trained men. The findings indicate that 3- minutes was superior 1-minute, but no additional benefit was noted for 5-minutes inter-set rest intervals, based on number of repetitions completed in subsequent sets for both heavy and light loads.

Study Summary

Study Design	Randomized Crossover Design
Level of Evidence	IB Evidence from at least one randomized controlled trial
Subject Characteristics	Demographics: Gender: Male Number of participants: 16 Age: 20.75 + 2.54 Inclusion Criteria: Resistance training at least 4-times per week, 1 hour per session, using inter-set rest periods of 1-2 minutes. No presence of anabolic steroids, ergogenic aids or other agents used for muscle growth or performance enhancement. No additional physical activity during testing. Exclusion Criteria: Less than 1 year of resistance training
Methodology	All participants were familiarized with the exercise procedures and techniques. 1 Repetition maximum (1-RM) for the tricep pull-down was established by determining the greatest load performed in two separate testing sessions held 48-72 hours apart. Participants performed 2 warm-up sets of 12 repetitions with 40% of their self-estimated 8-RM load. Participants were given a maximum of 5 trials, with at least 5 minutes of rest between attempts to achieve their 1-RM. Each participant took part in testing at the same time each day. 48 hours after load tests, participants were randomly assigned an order for 6 training sessions (2 intensities x 3 inter-set rest period lengths): 2 intensities of 50% and 80% of 1-RM were used for testing. 3 rest periods of 1, 3 and 5-minutes were used for the triceps pull-down exercise. Participants were told to perform as many repetitions as possible without pausing. After each set, each participant took the OMNI-Resistance Exercise Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) assessment. 48 hours of recovery was given between sessions.
Data Collection and Analysis	Statistics calculations were performed using SPSS 21.0 software (IBM, Inc.). An alpha value of p £ 0.05 was used to determine significance at each comparison. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to verify the reliability of the test and retest values for the 1 RM. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to calculate the differences for the total number of repetitions (sum of repetitions after 4 sets) among the inter-set rest periods and intensities. For each set, a two-way ANOVA was used to calculate the interaction between repetition performance and each inter-set rest period and intensity. The Tukey post-hoc analysis was applied for multiple comparisons, when necessary. Effect size was calculated by repetition performance values for each intensity and rest period, to determine the magnitude of the changes. The Friedman test was applied to analyze differences between the RPE values for rest periods and for intensities. The Dunnet post-hoc analysis was used for multiple comparisons, when necessary. An alpha value of p < 0.05 was used to determine significance at each comparison.
Outcome Measures	Total number of repetitions completed in all sets. Difference in number of repetitions performed for each set. Difference in RPE between 1, 3 and 5-minute inter-set rest periods.
Results	Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) ICC data showed an excellent correlation (p=0.99) between the test and retest for the 1 RM of the triceps pull-down. Total Number of Repetitions Lighter 50% of 1 RM intensity: There were significant reductions in total number of repetitions when comparing 1 to 3 minute (p=0.001), 1 to 5 minute (p=0.001) and 3 to 5 minute (p=0.005) inter-set rest periods. Heavier 80% of 1 RM intensity: There were significant reductions in the total number of repetitions when comparing 1 to 3 minute (p=0.001) and 1 to 5 minute (p=0.001) inter-set rest periods. No observable differences were noted between 3 and 5 minute rest periods (p>0.900). Repetition Performance Both intensities demonstrated significant interactions for the inter-set rest periods and repetition performance for each set (50% of 1 RM p=0.0001; 80% of 1 RM p=0.0001). Significant reductions in repetition performance for subsequent sets for each inter-set rest protocol were noted (50% of 1 RM p=0.003; 80% of 1 RM p=0.0001). Significant reductions in repetition performance between inter-rest periods for each set at both intensities were noted (50% of 1 RM p=0.0001; 80% of 1 RM p=0.0001). Progressive Performance Reductions in progressive performance were noted for all protocols (1, 3 and 5 minutes) starting as early as the 2nd set. For the 1-minute inter-set rest period, the reduction was more pronounced for both lighter (50% 1-RM) and heavier (80% 1-RM) loads compared to the 3-minute and 5-minute inter-set rest periods. Rating of Perceived Exertion RPE scores were elevated during the third and fourth sets at all intensities.
Our Conclusions	The findings indicate that 3- minutes was superior 1-minute, but no additional benefit was noted for 5-minutes inter-set rest intervals, based on number of repetitions completed in subsequent sets for both heavy and light loads.
Researchers' Conclusions	A 1- minute inter-set rest period resulted in greater performance reductions for each intensity (50% and 80% of 1 RM). The 3-minute inter-set rest period allowed adequate recovery, and did not result in performance significantly different from the 5-minute rest period. A 3-minute rest period may be adequate to attain the volumes necessary to elicit hypertrophic and endurance adaptations.

How This Study Contributes to the Body of Research:

This study compared the volume of repetitions performed during a triceps push-down exercise under two loads (50% and 80% of 1 repetition maximum), using three inter-set rest periods (1-, 3- and 5-minutes). Prior research has demonstrated that rest periods longer than 60 seconds may improve performance in subsequent sets (7-17). The findings of this study also demonstrated that 60 seconds may be an insufficient inter-set rest period. Unique to this study, findings demonstrated little difference between 3 and 5 minute inter-set rest periods, and optimal inter-set rest period length was not affected by load. These findings may aid practitioners in establishing an upper limit to the amount of time needed between sets to optimize performance in subsequent sets.

How the Findings Apply to Practice:

The findings of this study findings demonstrate that one minute inter-set rest periods are insufficient for maintaining optimal performance; however, little difference was noted between 3 and 5 minute inter-set rest periods. This suggests that human movement professionals should consider the use of 3 minute inter-set rest periods in routines that include multiple sets per muscle group, and would benefit from optimal performance with each subsequent set.

Strengths

The crossover design reduced the influence of confounding variables, including individual ability.
Researchers calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and demonstrated excellent repeatability of the 1-repetition maximum (RM) measurement.
Participants were randomly assigned to training sessions, enhancing the reliability of the results.

Weakness and limitations

With only 1 session of each protocol, and 48-hours between each session, it is unclear what adaptations would have occurred with multiple sessions and how that may alter outcomes.
The study used a single-joint, upper-body movement; this may limit generalizability to lower body exercises, and multi-joint exercise.
All participants were trained men; additional studies on females and untrained individuals are recommended.

How Does It Relate to Brookbush Institute Content?

The Brookbush Institute (BI) recommends 2 - 3 minute inter-set rest periods for most goals based on the aggregation of research findings. Load, velocity, rep range, volume, training experience, and intent may refine this recommendation for certain goals. The BI will continue to aggregate all available to research in a continued effort to refine acute variable recommendations (reps, sets, load, velocity, tempo) for optimal performance and rehabilitation.

Sample Strength Training Videos Below:

Back Squat from Brent Brookbush

Bibliography:

Baechle, T.R., & Earle, R.W. (2008). Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning (3rd ed.). Champaing, IL; Human Kinetics.
American College of Sports Medicine. (2009). Position stand: Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Medical Science in Sports and Exercise, 41(3 ), 687-708.
Sutton, B. (2017). NASM essentials of personal fitness training: 6th Edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Fleck, S.J. & Kraemer, W.J. (1997). Designing resistance training programs (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL; Human Kinetics.
Fink, J., Schoenfeld, B., Kikuchi, N., & Nazakato, K. Acute and long-term responses to different rest intervals in low-load resistance training. International Journal of Sports Medicine. Int J Sports Med. 2017; 38(02): 118-124
Kraemer, W.J., Noble, B.J., Clark, M.J., & Culver, B.W. (1987). Physiological responses to heavy-resistance exercise with very short rest periods. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 8 (4), 247-252.
Jambassi Filho, J., Gobbi, L., Gurjao, A., Goncalves, R., Prado, Alexandre, and Gobbi, S. (2013). Effect of different rest intervals, between sets, on muscle performance during leg press exercise, in trained older women. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, (12), 138-143.
Hernandez-Davo, J., Ruiz, J., & Sabido, R. (2017). Influence of strength level on the rest interval required during an upper-body power training session. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(2), 339-347
Schoenfeld, B.J., Pope, Z.K., Benik, F.M., Hester, G.M., Sellers, J., Nooner, J.L., Schnaiter, J.A., Bond-Williams, K.E., Carter, A.S., Ross, C.L. and Just, B.L. Longer interset rest periods enhance muscle strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men. J Str Cond Res. July 2016; 30(7): 1805-1812.
Humberto, M., Simao, R., Moreira, L.M., de Souza, R.A., de Souza, J.A., de Salles, B.F., & Willardson, J.M. (2009). Effect of rest interval length on the volume completed during upper body resistance exercise. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 8 (3), 388-392.
Pincivero, D.M., Lephart, S.M., & Karunakara, R.G. (1997). Effects of rest interval on isokinetic strength and functional performance after short-term high intensity training. British Journal of Medicine, 31 (3 ), 229-234.
Ahtiainen, J.P., Pakarinen, A.A., Kraemer, W.J., & Hakkinen, K. (2005). Short vs. long rest periods between the sets in hypertrophic resistance training: Influence on muscle strength, size, and hormonal adaptations in trained men. Journal of Strength Conditioning Research, 19 (3), 572-582.
Richmond, S.R. & Godard, M.P. (2004). The effects of rest periods between sets to failure using the bench press in recreationally trained men. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 18(4), 846-859.
Senna G, Willardson JM, Salles BF, Scudese E, Carneiro F, Palma A, Simão R. The effect of rest interval length on multi and single-joint exercise performance and perceived exertion. J Str Cond Res. Nov 2011; 25(11): 3157-3162
Senna, G., Scudese, E., Carneiro, F., Torres, J., Queiroz, C., & Dantas, E. (2015). Multi-joint and single-joint exercise performance and perceived exertion with several different recoveries. Journal of Exercise Physiology Online, 18 (3), 91-100.
Senna, G., Figueiredo, T., Scudese, E., Baffi, M, Carneiro, F., Maraes, E…Simao, R. (2012). Influence of different rest interval lengths in mult-joint and single-joint exercises on repetition performance, perceived exertion, and blood lactate. Journal of Exercise Physiology Online, 15 (5), 96-106.
Senna, G.W., Rodrigues, B.M., Sandy, Scudese, Bianco, A, & Dantas, E.H.M. (2017). Heavy vs light load single-joint exercise performance with different intervals. Journal of Human Kinetics, 58, 197-206.

Questions, comments, and criticisms are welcomed and encouraged -