Responsiveness of functional performance and muscle strength, power, and size to resistance training: A systematic review
- PMID: 38708326
- PMCID: PMC11067735
- DOI: 10.1016/j.smhs.2023.12.003
Responsiveness of functional performance and muscle strength, power, and size to resistance training: A systematic review
Abstract
There is a recent and growing interest in assessing differential responders to resistance training (RT) for diverse outcomes. Thus, the individual ability to respond to an intervention for a specific measurement, called responsiveness, remains to be better understood. Thus, the current study aimed to summarize the available information about the effects of RT on functional performance and muscle strength, power, and size in healthy adults, through the prevalence rate in different responsiveness classifications models. A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42021265378). PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase databases were systematically searched in October 2023. A total of 13 studies were included, totaling 921 subjects. Only two studies presented a low risk of bias. Regarding the effectiveness of RT, the prevalence rate for non-responders ranged from 0% to 44% for muscle strength, from 0% to 84% for muscle size, and from 0% to 42% for functional performance, while for muscle power, the only study found showed a responsiveness rate of 37%. In conclusion, a wide range of differential responders is described for all variables investigated. However, the evidence summarized in this systematic review suggested some caution while interpreting the findings, since the body of evidence found seems to be incipient, and widely heterogeneous in methodological and statistical aspects.
Keywords: Biological individuality; Functional performance; Heterogeneity; Inter-individual variation; Muscle strength; Skeletal muscle; Strength training.
© 2023 Chengdu Sport University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors state that they have no conflict of interest to declare.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
The influence of resistance exercise training prescription variables on skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical function in healthy adults: An umbrella review.J Sport Health Sci. 2024 Jan;13(1):47-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2023.06.005. Epub 2023 Jun 28. J Sport Health Sci. 2024. PMID: 37385345 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Dose-Response Relationships of Resistance Training in Healthy Old Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports Med. 2015 Dec;45(12):1693-720. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0385-9. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 26420238 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Effects of Supervised vs. Unsupervised Training Programs on Balance and Muscle Strength in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports Med. 2017 Nov;47(11):2341-2361. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0747-6. Sports Med. 2017. PMID: 28573401 Review.
-
The Effects of Resistance Training on Muscular Fitness, Muscle Morphology, and Body Composition in Elite Female Athletes: A Systematic Review.Sports Med. 2023 Sep;53(9):1709-1735. doi: 10.1007/s40279-023-01859-4. Epub 2023 Jun 8. Sports Med. 2023. PMID: 37289331 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources