Shibata, K, Yamaguchi, T, Takizawa, K, and Nosaka, K. Comparison between eccentric-concentric and eccentric-only dumbbell arm curl exercise training for their effects on neuromuscular adaptations. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2026-Eccentric-concentric (ECC-CON), low-load (ECC-Low), and high-load eccentric-only (ECC-High) dumbbell arm-curl exercise training were compared to test the hypothesis that ECC-Low would induce similar neuromuscular adaptations to ECC-CON and ECC-High. Thirty-four male university students without regular elbow flexor resistance exercise training were placed to ECC-CON (n = 11), ECC-Low (n = 11), or ECC-High (n = 12) group, and trained twice weekly for 6 weeks. The training load was progressively increased from 30 to 90% of concentric-only one-repetition maximum (CON1-RM) for ECC-CON and ECC-Low, and of eccentric-only 1-RM (ECC1-RM) for ECC-High. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was recorded after each set and averaged RPE was obtained. Changes in elbow flexion CON1-RM and ECC1-RM, maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength at 30°, 60°, and 90° elbow flexion, concentric peak power at 30% MVIC, and biceps brachii and brachialis muscle thickness (MT) were compared between groups by split-plot analyses of variance. RPE was lower (p < 0.05) in ECC-Low (4.0 ± 0.7) and ECC-High (5.1 ± 1.1) than ECC-CON (6.2 ± 1.1). ECC1-RM, MVIC strength at all angles, and concentric peak power increased (p < 0.01) similarly between groups (e.g., ECC1-RM, ECC-CON: 9.8 ± 4.8%, ECC-Low: 10.3 ± 4.9%, ECC-High: 12.8 ± 7.1%), but increases (p < 0.01) in CON1-RM (ECC-CON: 11.8 ± 7.1%, ECC-High: 9.9 ± 5.3%) and MT (3.9 ± 3.1%, 5.4 ± 4.4%) were evident only after ECC-CON and ECC-High without a difference. These results did not fully support the hypothesis, but ECC-Low was effective for improving 6 of 8 measures similarly to ECC-High and ECC-CON with lower RPE. This suggests the efficacy of eccentric-only resistance exercise training for individuals who are novice in elbow flexor resistance exercise training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shibata et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: