Verifi cation of possible differences between different days of testing of repetition maximum (1RM)

(1)

EISSN 1676-5133

Original Article doi:10.3900/fpj.6.4.232.e

Correspondence to:

Submitted: December / 2006 Accepted: February / 2007

Aguinaldo Manoel da Silva Junior1 [email protected] Michel Leonardo Ferreira Lima2,3

mlfl [email protected]

Leonardo Gonçalves Ribeiro3,4 leo_gonç[email protected]

Estélio Henrique Martin Dantas3,4 [email protected]

1 _{Programa Euro-americano de Pós-Graduação Strictu Sensu em Saúde - UC/PY -} Mestrado em Medicina do Esporte

2 _{Programa Euro-americano de Pós-Graduação Strictu Sensu em Saúde - UC/PY -} Dou-torado em Medicina do Esporte

3 _{Laboratório de Biociência da Motricidade Humana - LABIMH - UCB - RJ} 4 _{Universidade Castelo Branco - RJ}

Rua Passos, 401 - Centro - Piumhi - MG, CEP 37925-000

Silva-Junior AM, Lima MLF, Ribeiro LG, Dantas EHM. Verification of possible differences between different days of testing of repetition maximum (1RM). Fit Perf J. 2007;6(4):232-6.

Verifi cation of possible differences

between different days of testing

of repetition maximum (1RM)

ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to verify the existence of differences in the 1RM test accomplished in different days, in

students with previous experience in muscular activity. The justifi cation of the study accomplishment is centered in the need of the ac-complishment of the test and retest for a larger reliability of the 1RM results. For this, fi fteen individuals were selected with mean age of 20.6±2.8 years, corporal mass of 72.78±8.14kg and stature of 178.60±7.02cm. In 1RM in the exercise supine rectum, mean of 72.28±17.53kg and mean value of 1RM for the elbow fl exing with halter exercise of 46.40±8.56kg. The used methodology was constituted of evaluations with intervals of 6 days, alternate with 24 hours. The anthropometrical evaluations happened before the fi rst day of the strength test. The used statistical treatment was descriptive analysis and the use of ANOVA post hoc of Tukey, adopting a signifi cance level of the variables of p<0.05. The presented results demonstrate that, so much for the supine straight exercise as for the elbow fl exing with halter exercise, differences were not observed between the fi rst and the last testing. It can be affi rmed that, for the used sample, the practicing students of muscular activity that are classifi ed as intermediate, it is enough a testing day for the 1RM values reliability.

(2)

RESUMO

Verificação das possíveis diferenças entre diferentes dias do teste de 1RM

O objetivo deste estudo foi verificar a existência de diferenças no teste de 1RM realizado em diferentes dias, em alunos com experiência prévia em musculação. A justificativa da realização deste estudo centra-se na necessidade da realização de teste e reteste para uma maior confiabilidade dos resultados de 1RM. Foram selecionados quinze indivíduos com idade média de 20,6±2,8 anos, massa corporal de 72,78±8,14kg e estatura de 178,60±7,02cm, média de 1RM no exercício supino reto de 72,28±17,53kg e valor médio de 1RM para o exercício de flexão de cotovelo com halter de 46,40±8,56kg. A metodologia utilizada foi constituída de avaliações com intervalos de 6 dias, alternados com 24 horas. As avaliações antropométricas aconteceram antes do primeiro dia do teste de força. No tratamento estatístico utilizou-se análise descritiva e ANOVA post hoc de Tukey, adotando um nível de significância das variáveis de p<0,05. Os resultados apre-sentados demonstram que, tanto para o exercício de supino reto quanto para o exercício de flexão de cotovelo com halter, não foram observadas diferenças entre a primeira e a última testagem. Pode-se afirmar que, para a amostra utilizada, alunos praticantes de musculação classificados como intermediário, é suficiente um dia de testagem para a confiabilidade dos valores de 1RM.

Palavras-chave: teste de 1RM, musculação, reteste.

RESUMEN

Verificación de las posibles diferencias entre diferentes días del test de 1RM

El objetivo de este estudio fue a verificar la existencia de diferencias en el test de 1RM realizado en diferentes días, en alumnos con experiencia previa en musculación. El justificante de la realización de este estudio se centra en la necesidad de la realización del test y retest para una mayor confiabilidad de los resultados de 1RM. Para esto, habían sido seleccionados quince individuos con edad media de 20,6±2,8 años, masa corporal de 72,78± 8,14kg y estatura de 178,60±7,02cm, media de 1RM en el ejercicio supino recto de 72,28±17,53kg y valor mediano de 1RM para el ejercicio de flexión de codo con peso de 46,40±8,56kg. La metodología utilizada fue constituida de evaluaciones con intervalos de 6 días, alternados con 24 horas. Las evaluaciones antropométricas acontecieron antes del primer día del test de fuerza. El tratamiento estadístico utilizado fue análisis descriptiva y la utilización de la ANOVA post hoc de Tukey, adoptando un nivel de acepción de las variables de p<0,05. Los resultados presentados demuestran que, tanto para el ejercicio de supino recto cuanto para el ejercicio de flexión de codo con peso, no habían sido observadas difer-encias entre el primeiro y lo último test. Se puede afirmar que, para la muestra utilizada, los alumnos practicantes de musculación que seamos clasificados como intermediario, es suficiente un día de testes para la confiabilidad de los valores de 1RM.

Palabras clave: test de 1RM, musculación, retest.

INTRODUCTION

The muscular strength is an important component of physical fi tness related to health, and have a relevant role for the physical performance in several sports modalities1_{. There are several ways}

and methods to work the muscle strength component includes the practice of exercises with weights as the most widely used nowa-days for its feature easy to control through exercises located. For a long time it is prioritized the development of the aerobic component in the work of physical fi tness, but from the 80 training of the force began to have a greater recovery, which included the recommendations of the American College of Sports Medicine2_.

With this recovery grew together the number of searches in this area mainly in the question of assessment of muscular strength. The test of a repetition maximum (1-RM) has been widely used to evaluate muscle strength with different populations, in order that the result obtained is capable of generating analysis on the behavior of different muscle groups, assessing the effectiveness or not of a training program of force or provide data to control the intensity of the exercise3_.

But some factors can interfere in the outcome of this type of test and this has caused several discussions in academic level and even professional on the reliability of the information obtained in these tests. A Form of decline such concerns is the achievement of a retest for confi rmation of the data obtained, according to some authors prior familiarity with the procedures of testing is perhaps the main factor that could signifi cantly sensitive the evaluation and prescription of overload training mainly in programmers of exercises with weights3_.

So the purpose of this study was to verify there is no difference between the test of 1-RM at different days in subject

practitioners of exercises with weights (weight training) with pre-vious experience of at least six months.

METHODOLOGY

Sample

Fifteen subjects were male (20.6 ± 2.84 years), apparently healthy participated voluntarily in this study. As a criterion for inclusion the volunteers should be physically active (often at least three times per week of physical activity and have at least six months of experience in Strength Training. After clarifi cation on the purpose of search and procedures of which would be submitted and a negativity all the questions in the questionnaire Par-Q and history on osteoarticular lesions and muscle-tendineas, signed a term of free and informed consent.

Anthropometry

The anthropometric data were collected with the purpose of characterizing the sample on the body composition using a di-gital scale Brand Full, with precision of 0.1 kg for stature used a professional estadiometer steel Brand Sanny with precision of 0. 1 cm, for the purposes of skinfolds used a compass of scientifi c skinfolds Brand Sanny.

The body composition was determined by the Protocol of seven skinfolds (pectoral, average axillary, triciptal, sub scapular, abdo-men, suprailiac, thigh) using the equation proposed by Jackson Pollock and for body density and the data entered in the equation of Siri to obtain the values of % fat4_.

(3)

Muscular Strength

All subjects underwent six sessions of tests of 1-RM, in the exercise of supine horizontal (position starting and fi nal - photo 1) with an interval of 24 hours between each session to evaluate the maximum muscular strength.

Similarly in the performance of simultaneous threads with dumb-bells (initial and fi nal position- photo 2) the subjects underwent six sessions of tests of 1-RM with the same interval of 24 hours. The materials used in making 1-RM were a massive bar of 180 centimeters in length and weighing 7 kg washers 1kg, 2kg, 3kg, 4kg, 5kg, 10kg and 20kg in the performance of horizontal supine with the bank specifi cally for this exercise. In pursuit of simulta-neous threads were used dumbbells of the model dumbbell 1kg to 40kg.

The order of execution of the tests was of the fi rst attempts of the year supine horizontal and after 5 minutes of rest between one year and another, the attempts were made of the exercise of simultaneous threads with dumbbells.

In each exercise was done in advance a warming without overlo-ading only with the gesture engine that would be used in the test for 1 minute and was given a period of 3 to 5 minutes between warm-up and the fi rst attempt in the test of 1-RM.

Subjects were instructed to try to hold two replications in each attempt, in the case of being completed two repetitions or if not complete even a repetition, gave up a period of 3 to 5 minutes

for a second attempt with a higher load (if completed two repeti-tions) or lower (if not completed any repetition) to that employed in previous attempt. A third and fi nal attempt was repeated in the same models of the second, if not determined the load on a single repetition maximum, therefore the burden of 1-RM was one in which the individual has achieved only one repetition maximum in the exercises. The implementation of the movement was adapted Second Protocol of Berger5_{cited and used in Chagas et al.}6

rou-tine and the test was consistent with the protocol of the American College of Sports Medicine2_.

Statistical Treatment

The data were processed using a descriptive analysis and use of the ANOVA post hoc Tukey adopting a level of signifi cance of the variables of p <0.05 using the statistical package SPSS version 12.0.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The great demand for weight training has encouraged research on well-established parameters, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends that training against resistance is part of a program of physical fi tness for adults and the elderly2_.

Tests for maximum strength and sub maximal are used, but they are few searches that prove their reliability7_{. The reliability of the}

test of 1-RM seems to be moderate to high, but other studies7,8,9_,

reported signifi cant differences between the fi rst and second test to be independent before or after a training program7_.

So to reduce the error of measurement10_{, it recommended that the}

subjects involved in some sessions of adjustment prior to tests7_.

But this fact has not been found in this work.

Table 1 are shown the data that characterize the sample on age, weight, height, corporal of mass index (CMI), body fat of the sub-jects investigated with average, standard deviation and measures of amplitude (maximum and minimum).

The data on mean values and standard deviation, and the am-plitude (minimum and maximum values), the results found in the performance of horizontal supine during the six days of tests are presented in Table 2.

Confronting with literature, a study1_{found to infl uence the process}

of familiarization for the evaluation of muscular strength in tests of 1-RM and signifi cant differences were found between days of testing in the horizontal bench press. According to the author the stabilization occurred only between sessions three and four of their study. These fi gures do not corroborate with the fi ndings therefore have not been verifi ed, signifi cant differences between the days when compared with each other every day.

Photo 1: Initial and fi nal position of the exercise supine horizontal

Photo 2: Initial and fi nal the performance of simultaneous with dumbbells

Table 1: Characteristics of the subjects of the sample Average Standard

Deviation Maximum Minimum

Weigth (kg) 72.30 6.94 83.50 55.30

Height (cm) 178.00 6.85 187.00 166.00

CMI (kg/m-2) 23.02 2.07 26.35 20.07

(4)

The results indicated that for the exercise of horizontal bench press no signifi cant difference was observed (p <0.05) between the fi rst and last day of testing as well as any of the comparisons made between every day (Figure 1).

This fi nding is contrary to the fi ndings of Dias et.al.1_{,Cronin &}

Hederson11_{, Salvador et al.}12 _{, Bland & Altman}13_{e Komi}14_{, noted}

that signifi cant difference between the days of test, because the cargo received no signifi cant difference (p> 0.05) in any leaving characteristic of the days it is not necessary to the process of fa-miliarization in the exercise and that the absence of this process does not affect the value of 1-RM, the sample selected for this search.

Then the data on mean values and standard deviation, and the amplitude (minimum and maximum values), the results found in the performance of simultaneous threads with dumbbells during the six days of tests show up in Table 2.

Again the data found in this study goes against the fi ndings by Days et. al.1_{and other authors}11, 12, 13,14_{, since no signifi cant differences}

were observed between days.

The contrast with other fi ndings1_{of this study is given perhaps one}

of the variables infl uenced for no difference found in different days of testing, the type of exercise or the equipment used for checking the muscular strength.

But valley noted that the gesture is the same engine, leaving cha-racteristic that fact may have different implements this comparison is not character in order that the muscles acting in the performance and the feature of the test is the same.

So for the fi nancial year threaded simultaneous with dumbbells in the same way were not signifi cant differences (p <0.05) between

the fi rst and last day of testing as well as any of the comparisons made between all days (Figure 2).

This shows again that the process of familiarization not infl uence the test of 1-RM in our sample is not necessary to use this pro-cess.

Days et. al1_{in their study suggests that for a proper evaluation of}

muscular strength of men young adults, with previous experience in exercises with weights, to be held at least three sessions of tests familiarization in tests of 1-RM for the fi nancial year and two hori-zontal bench press sessions for the year direct biceps twist. But the fi ndings in this study demonstrate the contrary, it is not necessary to this process of familiarization, because signifi cant differences (p> 0.05) between days of tests of 1-RM were not found.

Through these data can be stated that the sample used for the students who practice weights that have at least six months of experience and frequency in the activity, one day of testing is enough to the reliability of the values of 1-RM.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded through this study that used to sample, students who engage weights training that are classifi ed as intermediate (more than six months of practice), a day of testing is enough to the reproducibility of the values of 1RM in exercises of bench press horizontal and twist simultaneous with dumbbells not needed, so a period of familiarization with the test. Perhaps this familiarity can be related directly to students without previous experience in

Graphic 1: Values of 1-RM at different days of the exercise of straight bench press

Table 2: Average values of the days of testing in the perfor-mance of horizontal bench press (kg)

Average Standard

1º day 73.00 18.40 119.00 45.00 2º day 73.00 17.85 119.00 49.00 3º day 75.00 17.93 119.00 49.00 4º day 75.00 18.00 119.00 49.00 5º day 75.00 18.00 119.00 49.00 6º day 75.00 18.02 119.00 49.00 Tukey HSD p<0.05 1.00

Table 3: Average values of the days of testing in the perfor-mance of simultaneous threads with dumbbells (sum of the right and left sides kg)

Average Standard

1º day 40.00 9.63 60 26 2º day 44.00 9.97 60 28 3º day 44.00 9.93 60 28 4º day 44.00 9.87 60 28 5º day 44.00 9.87 60 28 6º day 44.00 9.80 60 28 Tukey HSD P<0.05 0.974

Graphic 2: Values of 1-RM at different days of the exercise of bending the elbow with dumbbell.

(5)

training with weights, so one of the recommendations for further research, and examine other exercises, with that, other muscular groups. The time factor for recovery, also can be attributed as possible infl uencing the performance of muscular strength. The-refore these are made recommendations.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE

1. Dias RM, Cyrino ES, Salvador EP, Caldeira LF, Nakamura FY, Papst RR, et al. Infl uência do processo de familiarização para avaliação da força muscular em testes de 1-RM. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte. 2005;11(1):34-38.

2. American College of Sports Medicine Position Stand. The recommended quantily and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and fi tness, ande fl exi-bility in healthy adults. Medicine Sciense of Sports and Exercise. 1998;30(6): 975-991. 3. Gurjão AL, Cyrino ES, Caldeira LF, Nakamura FY, Oliveira AR, Salvador EP et al.. Variação da Força muscular em testes repetitivos de 1-RM em crianças pré-puberes. 2005;11(6):319324.

4. Marins JC, Giannichi RS. Avaliação & Prescrição de Atividade Física: Guia Prático. 3ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Shape;2003.

5. Berger AR. Optimum repetitions for the development of strength. Res Q.1962;33:334-338.

6. Chagas MH, Barbosa JRM, Lima FV. Comparação do número máximo de repetições realizadas a 40% e 80% de uma repetição máxima em dois exercícios na musculação

entre os gêneros masculino e feminino. Revista Brasileira de Educação Física Especiali-zada. 2005;19(1):5-12.

7. Pereira MI, Gomes PS. Testes de força e resistência muscular: confi abilidade e predição de uma repetição máxima - Revisão e novas evidências. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte.2003;9(5):325-335.

8. Braith RW, Graves JE, Leggett SH, Pollock ML. Effect of training on the rela-tionship between maximal and submaximal strength. Medicine Sciense of Sports and Exercise.1993;25(1):132-138.

9. Rikli RE, Jones CJ, Beam WC, Duncan SJ, Lamar B. Testeing versus training effects on 1RM strength assessment in older adults. Medicine Sciense of Sports and Exercise.1996;28:S153.

10. Hopkins L, Cochrane J, Mayhew JL. Prediction of arm and leg strength from teh 7-10 RM before and after strength training on Nautilus machine weights. IAHPERD Journal.1999;33:40-41.

11. Cronin JB, Hederson ME. Maximal strength and power assessment in novice weight trainers. Jornal Strength Cond. Res.1997;11:143147.

12. Salvador EP, Dias RM, Braghin RS, Cyrino ES. Infl uência da experiência em treinamento com pesos no processo de familiarização ao teste de 1-RM. III Congresso Científi co Latino-Americano de Educação Física e Esportes. 2004; Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba – UNIMEP. Piracicaba – SP. 1159.

13. Bland JM, Altman DJ. Regression analysis.Lancet. 1986 Apr 19;1(8486):908-909. 14. Komi PV. Training of muscle strength and power: interaction of neuromotoric, hyper-trophic and mechanical factors. Int. J. Sports Med. 1986;7:10-15.

(6)