Why the study?
Large and abrupt rises in systolic blood pressure during resistance exercise raise safety concerns in hypertension, but whether manipulating protocol organization with an equated work-to-rest ratio reduces this increase was unclear.
Does a resistance training protocol of 9x5:22s reduce acute systolic blood pressure increase compared to a 3x15:88s protocol in medicated hypertensive individuals?
Does a resistance training protocol of 9x5:22s reduce acute systolic blood pressure increase compared to a 3x15:88s protocol in medicated hypertensive individuals?
In medicated hypertensives, a resistance training protocol with more sets, fewer repetitions, and shorter rest intervals (9 × 5:22 s) produces a smaller acute increase in cardiovascular load compared to a traditional protocol (3 × 15:88 s).
Favors 9 × 5:22 s protocols to limit acute hemodynamic load in medicated hypertensives; extends RT prescription research for CV safety.
Introduction: Despite growing evidence regarding the benefits of resistance training in hypertension, the large and abrupt rise of systolic blood pressure (SBP) observed during resistance exercise execution has resulted in concern about its safety. However, the manipulation of the resistance training protocol (RTP) organization, maintaining the work to rest ratio equated between protocols (W:R-equated), may reduce the SBP increase. Purpose: To compare cardiovascular responses during two W:R-equated RTPs (3 × 15:88 s vs. 9 × 5:22 s – sets × reps: rest between sets) performed in exercises for the lower and upper limbs. Methods: Twelve medicated hypertensives (48 ± 8 years) randomly performed two RTPs in the bilateral leg extension (BLE) and unilateral elbow flexion (UEF) exercises at 50% 1RM. Increases (Δ) of SBP, heart rate (HR) and rate pressure product (RPP) during the exercises were measured by photoplethysmography. Results: In both BLE and UEF exercises, Δ SBP was significantly greater during 3 × 15:88 s than 9 × 5:22 s (peak values: BLE = + 84 ± 39 vs. + 67 ± 20 mm Hg, and UEF = + 46 ± 25 vs. + 37 ± 18 mm Hg, respectively, both p < 0.05). ΔHR and ΔRPP were significantly higher in the 3 × 15:88 s than 9 × 5:22 s in BLE (peak values + 45 ± 17 vs. + 30 ± 8 bpm, and + 15,559 ± 5570 vs. + 10,483 ± 2614 mm Hg. bpm). Conclusion: In medicated hypertensives, a RTP combining more sets with less repetitions per set and shorter rest intervals between sets (i.e., 9 × 5:22 s) produced a smaller increase in cardiovascular load (ΔSBP, ΔHR and ΔRPP) during its execution than a protocol with fewer longer sets (i.e., 3 × 15:88 s).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paulo et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: