Give it a rest: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis on the effect of inter-set rest interval duration on muscle hypertrophy

doi:10.3389/fspor.2024.1429789

Paper

Give it a rest: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis on the effect of inter-set rest interval duration on muscle hypertrophy

Published Aug 14, 2024 · Alec Singer, Milo Wolf, Leonardo Generoso

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living

Q1 SJR score

0

Citations

0

Influential Citations

PDF

Semantic Scholar

Abstract

We systematically searched the literature for studies with a randomized design that compared different inter-set rest interval durations for estimates of pre-/post-study changes in lean/muscle mass in healthy adults while controlling all other training variables. Bayesian meta-analyses on non-controlled effect sizes using hierarchical models of all 19 measurements (thigh: 10; arm: 6; whole body: 3) from 9 studies meeting inclusion criteria analyses showed substantial overlap of standardized mean differences across the different inter-set rest periods [binary: short: 0.48 (95%CrI: 0.19–0.81), longer: 0.56 (95%CrI: 0.24–0.86); Four categories: short: 0.47 (95%CrI: 0.19–0.80), intermediate: 0.65 (95%CrI: 0.18–1.1), long: 0.55 (95%CrI: 0.15–0.90), very long: 0.50 (95%CrI: 0.14–0.89)], with substantial heterogeneity in results. Univariate and multivariate pairwise meta-analyses of controlled binary (short vs. longer) effect sizes showed similar results for the arm and thigh with central estimates tending to favor longer rest periods [arm: 0.13 (95%CrI: −0.27 to 0.51); thigh: 0.17 (95%CrI: −0.13 to 0.43)]. In contrast, central estimates closer to zero but marginally favoring shorter rest periods were estimated for the whole body [whole body: −0.08 (95%CrI: −0.45 to 0.29)]. Subanalysis of set end-point data indicated that training to failure or stopping short of failure did not meaningfully influence the interaction between rest interval duration and muscle hypertrophy. In conclusion, results suggest a small hypertrophic benefit to employing inter-set rest interval durations >60 s, perhaps mediated by reductions in volume load. However, our analysis did not detect appreciable differences in hypertrophy when resting >90 s between sets, consistent with evidence that detrimental effects on volume load tend to plateau beyond this time-frame. Systematic Review Registration: OSF, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YWEVC.

Meta-Analysis

Study Snapshot

Key takeawayInter-set rest interval durations >60 seconds may have a small hypertrophic benefit, but no significant differences in muscle hypertrophy were found when resting >90 seconds between sets.

PopulationOlder adults (50-71 years)

Sample size24

MethodsObservational

OutcomesBody Mass Index projections

ResultsSocial networks mitigate obesity in older groups.

Sign up to use Study Snapshot

Consensus is limited without an account. Create an account or sign in to get more searches and use the Study Snapshot.

Create an account

Paper

Give it a rest: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis on the effect of inter-set rest interval duration on muscle hypertrophy

Sign up to use Study Snapshot

References

Throwing cold water on muscle growth: A systematic review with meta‐analysis of the effects of postexercise cold water immersion on resistance training‐induced hypertrophy

Postexercise cold water immersion may attenuate hypertrophic changes in resistance training, but the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited quality of studies.

Optimizing mechanical performance in the bench press: The combined influence of inter-set rest periods and proximity to failure

Inter-set rest periods of 5 minutes are necessary for maintaining mechanical performance in bench press exercises near failure, while 3 minutes may suffice for farther from failure.

Repetition Performance, Rating of Perceived Discomfort, and Blood Lactate Responses to Different Rest Interval Lengths in Single-Joint and Multijoint Lower-Body Exercise

Longer rest intervals improve repetition performance and reduce perceived discomfort in lower-body exercises, while blood lactate levels are slightly higher with longer intervals.

Interpreting magnitude of change in strength and conditioning: Effect size selection, threshold values and Bayesian updating

Strength and conditioning training evaluations can be improved by using Bayesian approaches and specific thresholds, rather than isolated effect size calculations and Cohen's generic values.

Can High-Intensity Interval Training Promote Skeletal Muscle Anabolism?

HIIT may promote muscle growth and maintain muscle mass, particularly in susceptible populations and post-surgery settings.

Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

High-load resistance training programs improve muscle strength more effectively than low-load programs, with untrained individuals showing greater muscle hypertrophy and those with previous training experience benefiting more.

Does rest interval between sets affect resistance training volume, density, and rating of perceived exertion when adopting the crescent pyramid system in young women?

2 minutes of rest between sets in a crescent pyramid system allows for a high volume-load and density of resistance training in young women, while maintaining a high perception of effort.

Volume Load Rather Than Resting Interval Influences Muscle Hypertrophy During High-Intensity Resistance Training

During high-intensity resistance training, maintaining high loads is more important for strength increases, while a greater volume load plays a primary role for muscle hypertrophy, regardless of interset rest interval.

Citations