Skip Navigation LinksHome > August 2012 - Volume 26 - Issue 8 > Concurrent Training: A Meta-Analysis Examining Interference...
Text sizing:
A
A
A
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research:
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823a3e2d
Brief Review

Concurrent Training: A Meta-Analysis Examining Interference of Aerobic and Resistance Exercises

Wilson, Jacob M.1; Marin, Pedro J.2,3; Rhea, Matthew R.4; Wilson, Stephanie M.C.1; Loenneke, Jeremy P.5; Anderson, Jody C.1

Collapse Box

Abstract

Abstract: Wilson, JM, Marin, PJ, Rhea, MR, Wilson, SMC, Loenneke, JP, and Anderson, JC. Concurrent training: A meta-analysis examining interference of aerobic and resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 26(8): 2293–2307, 2012—The primary objective of this investigation was to identify which components of endurance training (e.g., modality, duration, frequency) are detrimental to resistance training outcomes. A meta-analysis of 21 studies was performed with a total of 422 effect sizes (ESs). Criteria for the study included were (a) compare strength training alone to strength plus endurance training (concurrent) or to compare combinations of concurrent training; (b) the outcome measures include at least one measure of strength, power, or hypertrophy; and (c) the data necessary to calculate ESs must be included or available. The mean ES for hypertrophy for strength training was 1.23; for endurance training, it was 0.27; and for concurrent training, it was 0.85, with strength and concurrent training being significantly greater than endurance training only. The mean ES for strength development for strength training was 1.76; for endurance training, it was 0.78; and for concurrent training, it was 1.44. Strength and concurrent training was significantly greater than endurance training. The mean ES for power development for strength training only was 0.91; for endurance training, it was 0.11; and for concurrent training, it was 0.55. Significant differences were found between all the 3 groups. For moderator variables, resistance training concurrently with running, but not cycling, resulted in significant decrements in both hypertrophy and strength. Correlational analysis identified significant negative relationships between frequency (−0.26 to −0.35) and duration (−0.29 to −0.75) of endurance training for hypertrophy, strength, and power. Significant relationships (p < 0.05) between ES for decreased body fat and % maximal heart rate (r = −0.60) were also found. Our results indicate that interference effects of endurance training are a factor of the modality, frequency, and duration of the endurance training selected.

© 2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association

 

Login

Article Tools

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.