Different Patterns in Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations in Untrained Individuals Undergoing Nonperiodized and Periodized Strength Regimens.
De Souza. Eduardo O EO; Tricoli. Valmor V; Rauch. Jacob J; Alvarez. Michael R MR; Laurentino. Gilberto G; Aihara. André Y AY; Cardoso. Fabiano N FN; Roschel. Hamilton H; Ugrinowitsch. Carlos C
Key Findings
- All training groups increased squat 1RM and quadriceps size over 12 weeks
- Traditional periodization was the only group to keep gaining strength between weeks 6 and 12
- Periodized programs (traditional and undulating) showed greater muscle size gains in the second half of the program
Practical Outcomes
- For beginners, any consistent strength program works, but using a periodized approach may give extra gains after the initial weeks. Consider switching to a periodized routine if progress stalls after six weeks.
Summary
The study looked at how three different 12‑week strength‑training plans (non‑periodized, traditional periodized, and daily undulating periodized) affect squat strength and thigh muscle size in beginners. All groups got stronger and bigger muscles, but the periodized programs showed slightly faster improvements after the first six weeks.
Abstract
De Souza, EO, Tricoli, V, Rauch, J, Alvarez, MR, Laurentino, G, Aihara, AY, Cardoso, FN, Roschel, H, and Ugrinowitsch, C. Different patterns in muscular strength and hypertrophy adaptations in untrained individuals undergoing non-periodized and periodized strength regimens. J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1238-1244, 2018-This study investigated the effects of nonperiodized (NP), traditional periodization (TP), and daily undulating periodization (UP) regimens on muscle strength and hypertrophy in untrained individuals. Thirty-three recreationally active males were randomly divided into 4 groups: NP: n = 8; TP: n = 9; UP: n = 8, and control group (C): n = 8. Experimental groups underwent a 12-week strength training program consisting of 2 sessions per week. Muscle strength and quadriceps cross-sectional area (QCSA) were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks (i.e., mid-point) and after 12 weeks. All training groups increased squat 1RM from pre to 6 weeks mid (NP: 17.02%, TP: 7.7%, and UP: 12.9%, p ≤ 0.002) and pre to post 12 weeks (NP: 19.5%, TP: 17.9%, and UP: 20.4%, p ≤ 0.0001). Traditional periodization was the only group that increased squat 1RM from 6 weeks mid to 12-week period (9.4%, p ≤ 0.008). All training groups increased QCSA from pre to 6 weeks mid (NP: 5.1%, TP: 4.6%, and UP: 5.3%, p ≤ 0.0006) and from pre to post 12 weeks (NP: 8.1%, TP: 11.3%, and UP: 8.7%, p ≤ 0.0001). From 6 weeks mid to 12-week period, TP and UP were the only groups that increased QCSA (6.4 and 3.7%, p ≤ 0.02). There were no significant changes for all dependent variables in C group across the time (p ≥ 0.05). In conclusion, our results demonstrated similar training-induced adaptations after 12 weeks of NP and periodized regimens. However, our findings suggest that in the latter half of the study (i.e., after the initial 6 weeks), the periodized regimens elicited greater rates of muscular adaptations compared with NP regimens. Strength coaches and practitioners should be aware that periodized regimens might be advantageous at latter stages of training even for untrained individuals.
Study Information
pubmed
2018
10.1519/jsc.0000000000002482