Network Magazine Summer 2017 | Page 50

kettlebells , boxing pads and elastic resistance training bands . This reminded me of one of our students who had recently asked if there was any benefit to using manual therapy or resistance training bands in mature-aged patients ( I believe the exact wording was old / somewhat frail ), and I said that when patients are debilitated ( i . e . poor muscular strength ), providing a progressive resistance , either manually or via the resistance training bands , would improve the person ’ s strength and , ideally , muscular function .

This leads us to the subject of this Research Review , in which Dr Chulvi- Medrano and his colleagues compared traditional weight training to manual resistance training . Manual resistance training effectively involves a training partner ( spotter or PT ) simulating the action and resistance usually provided by a free weight or machine . Previously , we have not investigated the effects of manual resistance training on maximal muscular strength and muscular endurance in the literature , however there are a number of studies showing its benefits in untrained or special populations and , in fact , the best example is with astronauts . Astronauts need to train at least two hours a day as there is dramatic muscle and bone loss due to the low gravity environments on space stations . The effect is so similar to that of ageing that some insights into the process of growing older may be gained from studying astronauts in space . One study showed a 30 % loss of bone mass due to exposure to microgravity for space station residents . This is similar to effects of osteoporosis that we witness down here on earth . It is believed that resistance training is more important

than aerobic training for these astronauts in minimising loss of both muscle and bone . It is interesting to consider this article in terms of manually applied resistances .

Methods : Healthy , young and experienced (> 1 year , recreationally trained ) males were recruited to participate in this study . The subjects ( n = 21 ) were randomly split into two groups , which trained twice per week over 8 weeks using either conventional resistance training or manual resistance .

Conventional resistance training : Following a standardised warm up ( 5 minutes of light jogging and dynamic stretching exercises ) participants performed bench press and lat pull-downs for 3 sets of 8 repetitions at an intensity of 8 out of 10 perceived exertion scale ( rated ‘ hard ’).

Manual resistance training : Following a standardised warm up identical to the conventional resistance training group , participants performed the same exercises , but via manual resistance provided by a certified personal trainer ( simulated bench press and lat pull downs for 3 sets of 8 repetitions , again at an intensity of 8 out of 10 ).

Maximal muscular strength ( i . e . 1RM for bench press and lat pull down ) was assessed using guidelines from the National Strength and Conditioning Association . Maximal muscular endurance ( pull ups and push ups ) was assessed according to guidelines from the American College of Sports Medicine . Perceived exertion was assessed using a visual pictogram in which 0 equalled ‘ no effort ’ and 10 was ‘ maximal effort ’.

Results : The following table illustrates the approximate percentage improvements for manual resistance training compared to traditional resistance training . Although the authors did not report any statistically significant differences between groups ( meaning that no method was clearly superior to the other ) on any of the outcome variables ( either 1RM or muscular endurance ) they did report increases ranging from + 6.9 % to + 26.3 % for manual resistance training and + 3.2 % to + 29.2 % for conventional resistance training , which we believe is a good result , especially for the manual resistance training group .

TABLE : Increases in strength and endurance after 8-week manual resistance and traditional resistance training programs

Test

Manual resistance ( increase , %)

Traditional resistance ( increase , %)

50 | NETWORK SUMMER 2017