Comparison of Periodization Models of Concurrent Training in Recreationally Active Postmenopausal Women

• Published in: Journal of strength and conditioning research 2022-04, Vol.36 (4), p.977-983
• Main Authors: Medeiros, Leonardo H.L., Sandbakk, Silvana B., Bertazone, Thaís M.A., Bueno Júnior, Carlos R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation; Adaptation, Physiological; Aged; Cardiorespiratory fitness; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Models, Biological; Muscle strength; Muscle Strength - physiology; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology; Physical fitness; Population studies; Post-menopause; Postmenopause - physiology; Resistance Training - methods; Weight Lifting - physiology
• ISSN: 1064-8011; 1533-4287
• DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003559

ABSTRACTMedeiros, LHL, Sandbakk, SB, Bertazone, TMA, and Bueno Júnior, CR. Comparison of periodization models of concurrent training in recreationally active postmenopausal women. J Strength Cond Res XX(X)000–000, 2020—Although concurrent training is the most effective way to improve both neuromuscular and cardiorespiratory functions in older populations, there are no studies in the literature comparing different periodization models on cardiorespiratory and muscle strength adaptations. Thus, the main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of different periodization models of concurrent aerobic and strength training using equalized training volume programs on muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness in recreationally active postmenopausal women. After 3 weeks of adaptation, 58 women aged 50–75 years were randomly assigned to (a) nonperiodization (NP), (b) daily nonlinear periodization (NLP), or (c) flexible daily NLP (FNLP). At baseline and after 12 weeks, aerobic fitness (peak oxygen uptake [V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak] and the 6-minute walk test) and maximal muscle strength (1 repetition maximum of bench press and leg press) were measured. It was shown that maximal strength increased in the bench press (effect size [ES] 1.18 in NLP and 1.22 in FNLP) and leg press (ES 0.92 in NLP and 0.89 in FNLP) in the periodized groups—in the NP group, these values were 0.49 and 0.46, respectively. In the 6-minute walk test, aerobic fitness statistically improved in all groups—with an ES of 1.02 in the NP, 1.33 in the NLP, and 0.54 in the FNLP. This study showed that only periodization models (NLP and FNLP) induced a moderate ES in maximal strength, and all groups (NP, NLP, and FNLP) demonstrated improved aerobic fitness evaluated by V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak and the 6-minute walk test in recreationally active postmenopausal women.