Full‐body resistance training promotes greater fat mass loss than a split‐body routine in well‐trained males: A randomized trial

• Published in: European journal of sport science 2024-06, Vol.24 (6), p.846-854
• Main Authors: Carneiro, Marcelo A. S., Nunes, Paulo Ricardo P., Souza, Markus V. C., Assumpção, Cláudio O., Orsatti, Fábio L.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Absorptiometry, Photon; Adipose Tissue; Adult; Body Composition; Humans; Male; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology; Resistance Training - methods; split routine; strength training; total‐body routine; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1746-1391; 1536-7290; 1536-7290
• DOI: 10.1002/ejsc.12104

While significant progress has been made in understanding the resistance training (RT) strategy for muscle hypertrophy increase, there remains limited knowledge about its impact on fat mass loss. This study aimed to investigate whether full‐body is superior to split‐body routine in promoting fat mass loss among well‐trained males. Twenty‐three participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: full‐body (n = 11, training muscle groups 5 days per week) and split‐body (n = 12, training muscle groups 1 day per week). Both groups performed a weekly set volume‐matched condition (75 sets/week, 8–12 repetition maximum at 70%–80 % of 1RM) for 8 weeks, 5 days per week with differences only in the routine. Whole‐body and regional fat were assessed using DXA at the beginning and at the end of the study. Full‐body RT elicited greater losses compared to split‐body in whole‐body fat mass (−0.775 ± 1.120 kg vs. +0.317 ± 1.260 kg; p = 0.040), upper‐limb fat mass (−0.085 ± 0.118 kg vs. +0.066 ± 0.162 kg; p = 0.019), gynoid fat mass (−0.142 ± 0.230 kg vs. +0.123 ± 0.230 kg; p = 0.012), lower‐limb fat mass (−0.197 ± 0.204 kg vs. +0.055 ± 0.328 kg; p = 0.040), and a trend in interaction in android fat mass (−0.116 ± 0.153 kg vs. +0.026 ± 0.174 kg; p = 0.051), with large effects sizes (η2p ≥ 0.17). This study provides evidence that full‐body is more effective in reducing whole‐body and regional fat mass compared to split‐body routine in well‐trained males. Highlights For strength and conditioning professionals, as well as practitioners aiming to optimize fat mass loss while minimizing delayed onset muscular soreness induced by training, the full‐body routine should be considered and recommended. Our findings shed new light on the manipulation of resistance training variables, particularly training routines, to optimize fat mass loss in the late stages of resistance training. This strategy appears to be particularly relevant for individuals aiming for esthetic physique performance.