Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorØfsteng, Sjur Johansen
dc.contributor.authorHammarström, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorKnox, Silje
dc.contributor.authorJøsok, Øyvind
dc.contributor.authorHelkala, Kirsi Marjaana
dc.contributor.authorKoll, Lise
dc.contributor.authorHanestadhaugen, Marita
dc.contributor.authorRaastad, Truls
dc.contributor.authorRønnestad, Bent
dc.contributor.authorEllefsen, Stian
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-27T07:13:42Z
dc.date.available2025-02-27T07:13:42Z
dc.date.created2024-08-26T11:19:55Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2024, 38 (9), 1584-1595.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1064-8011
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3180785
dc.description.abstractMuscle strength and power are important determinants of soldiers' performance in modern warfare. Here, we compare the efficacy of 22 weeks of whole-body resistance training with high load (HL, 10 repetitions maximum/RM) and low load (LL, 30RM) for developing maximal muscle strength and power, performance, and muscle mass in moderately trained cadets (20 ± 1 year, f; n = 5, m; n = 22). Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at week 22, in addition to a mid-intervention assessment at week 10. Twenty-two weeks of HL led to greater increases in muscle strength (upper limb, Δ 10%, 95% CI [2.8, 17.1], p = 0.01; lower limb, Δ 9.9%, CI [1.1, 18.6], p = 0.029), jump height (Δ 5.5%, CI [1.4, 9.6], p = 0.011), and upper limb lean mass (Δ 5.2%, CI [1, 9.4], p = 0.018) compared with LL. HL and LL led to similar changes in agility, muscle endurance performance, lower limb muscle mass, and cross-sectional area in m. vastus lateralis. For all variables, training-associated changes occurred primarily during the initial 10 weeks of the intervention, including the differential responses to HL and LL. In conclusion, although 22 weeks of HL led to greater increases in lower and upper limb muscle strength, power, and upper limb lean mass than LL, the 2 load conditions led to similar improvements in agility performance and lower limb muscle mass. Our results thus indicate that both loading regimes elicit multifaceted physiological improvements important for military readiness.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.titleSuperiority of High-Load vs. Low-Load Resistance Training in Military Cadetsen_US
dc.title.alternativeSuperiority of High-Load vs. Low-Load Resistance Training in Military Cadetsen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionen_US
dc.source.pagenumber1584-1595en_US
dc.source.volume38en_US
dc.source.journalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen_US
dc.source.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1519/JSC.0000000000004830
dc.identifier.cristin2289359
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record