ANZCTR - Registration

The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers

Trial registered on ANZCTR

Registration number

ACTRN12618001323213

Ethics application status

Approved

Date submitted

1/08/2018

Date registered

6/08/2018

Date last updated

6/08/2018

Type of registration

Retrospectively registered

Titles & IDs

Public title

Comparison of the musculoskeletal effects of different iso-inertial resistance training modalities: Flywheel vs. Electric-Motor

Scientific title

Functional and Structural effects of different iso-inertial resistance training modalities with eccentric overload in young, healthy, active males

Secondary ID [1]

Nil known

Universal Trial Number (UTN)

Trial acronym

Linked study record

Health condition

Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:

Muscle performance

Muscle architecture

Condition category

Condition code

Musculoskeletal

Normal musculoskeletal and cartilage development and function

Intervention/exposure

Study type

Interventional

Description of intervention(s) / exposure

Forty healthy males participated in the study. They were randomly divided into 3 experimental training groups and 1 control group, which did not train. Participants in the training groups completed 6 weeks (12 sessions) of unilateral, flywheel, single-leg squat resistance exercise. In two of the groups, the resistance was generated by an electric-motor device, configured in iso-inertial mode, and employing two different velocities in the eccentric actions; 100% with respect to concentric speed (experimental group 1; EX1), or 150% with respect to concentric speed (experimental group 2; EX2) (participantes were required to perform each concentric action at their own maximal speed; eccentric resistance is provided by the electric-motor device in base of the concentric speed, imitating a iso-inercial device). The third training group used a conventional flywheel device (experimental group 3; FW). Each training session consisted of 4 sets of 7 maximal concentric repetitions performed 2 times per week. Thigh muscle mass, unilateral maximal dynamic strength (1 repetition maximum; 1RM), bilateral and unilateral vertical jump performance, and unilateral muscle power at different percentages of 1RM were assessed approximately 1 week before and after the training period. Training protocols and tests were carried out by Sports Scientist and a Doctor.

Intervention code [1]

Treatment: Devices

Comparator / control treatment

The subjects were randomly located in the control group. All of them were subjects of the same characteristics. Participants of the control group were asked to maintain their weekly physical activity habits during the study period. The subjects were asked not to modify their eating habits, rest, training. The control group participants only carried out the pre and post tests, with the objective of comparing the training effects between participants who have undergone intervention and those who have not suffered it.

Control group

Active

Outcomes

Primary outcome [1]

Changes in muscle power
Unilateral muscle power was assessed at different loads of the Maximum Strength (1RM) in a Leg press device. Peak velocity, and average and peak power for each repetition were sampled at 1000 Hz using an encoder (T-FORCE Dynamic Measurement System, Ergotech Consulting S.L., Murcia, Spain) and the associated software (T-Force 21 v. 2.28) for each leg.

Timepoint [1]