Comparison of Olympic and Safety Squat Bar Barbells on Force, Velocity, and Rating of Perceived Exertion During Acute High-Intensity Back Squats in Recreationally Trained Men.
{"title":"Comparison of Olympic and Safety Squat Bar Barbells on Force, Velocity, and Rating of Perceived Exertion During Acute High-Intensity Back Squats in Recreationally Trained Men.","authors":"Noah Staheli, Jeffrey C Cowley, Marcus M Lawrence","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined using a traditional Olympic (OL) or safety squat bar (SSB) barbell on force, velocity, and perceived exertion during an acute session of high-intensity back squats in adults. Twelve recreationally trained men (23.0±2.6 years; 88.3±19.1 kg) randomly completed two sessions of 3 sets of 6 repetitions at the same absolute load using the OL barbell or SSB barbell. Force and velocity were measured on every repetition and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was assessed for each set. A two-way ANOVA (set x barbell) with repeated measures and Sidak post-hoc test (repetitions set-by-set) or paired t-test (repetitions independent of set) were used (p<0.05). Compared to a traditional OL barbell, using a SSB barbell resulted in no significant differences in peak force (2443.0±46.6 vs 2622.9±65.8 N, respectively; <i>d</i>=0.28) or average set RPE (7.8±0.8 vs 8.0±1.2, respectively; <i>d</i>=0.15) during an acute multi-set high-intensity back squat session. In contrast, compared to a traditional OL barbell, using a SSB barbell resulted in significantly (p<0.05) lower average velocity (0.42±0.04 vs 0.38±0.05 m/s, respectively; <i>d</i>=0.27) during the same parameters. When performing the back squat exercise recreationally resistance-trained adults exhibit similar peak force and perceived effort with OL or SSB barbells, but greater velocities can be achieved with the OL barbell. Practitioners working with adults to develop lower body strength and power with the back squat exercise across multiple sets can interchangeably use the OL or SSB barbells to similarly train force, but training velocity is trivially better with the OL barbell acutely.</p>","PeriodicalId":14171,"journal":{"name":"International journal of exercise science","volume":"17 7","pages":"1120-1133"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11385282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of exercise science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examined using a traditional Olympic (OL) or safety squat bar (SSB) barbell on force, velocity, and perceived exertion during an acute session of high-intensity back squats in adults. Twelve recreationally trained men (23.0±2.6 years; 88.3±19.1 kg) randomly completed two sessions of 3 sets of 6 repetitions at the same absolute load using the OL barbell or SSB barbell. Force and velocity were measured on every repetition and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was assessed for each set. A two-way ANOVA (set x barbell) with repeated measures and Sidak post-hoc test (repetitions set-by-set) or paired t-test (repetitions independent of set) were used (p<0.05). Compared to a traditional OL barbell, using a SSB barbell resulted in no significant differences in peak force (2443.0±46.6 vs 2622.9±65.8 N, respectively; d=0.28) or average set RPE (7.8±0.8 vs 8.0±1.2, respectively; d=0.15) during an acute multi-set high-intensity back squat session. In contrast, compared to a traditional OL barbell, using a SSB barbell resulted in significantly (p<0.05) lower average velocity (0.42±0.04 vs 0.38±0.05 m/s, respectively; d=0.27) during the same parameters. When performing the back squat exercise recreationally resistance-trained adults exhibit similar peak force and perceived effort with OL or SSB barbells, but greater velocities can be achieved with the OL barbell. Practitioners working with adults to develop lower body strength and power with the back squat exercise across multiple sets can interchangeably use the OL or SSB barbells to similarly train force, but training velocity is trivially better with the OL barbell acutely.
本研究考察了使用传统奥林匹克杠铃(OL)或安全深蹲杠铃(SSB)对成年人在高强度深蹲的急性训练中力量、速度和感觉消耗的影响。12 名接受过休闲训练的男性(23.0±2.6 岁;88.3±19.1 千克)随机使用奥林匹克杠铃或安全深蹲杠铃在相同的绝对负荷下完成了两次 3 组 6 次重复训练。对每次重复的力量和速度进行测量,并评估每组的体力消耗等级(RPE)。在急性多组高强度深蹲训练中,采用了重复测量的双向方差分析(组 x 杠铃)和 Sidak 事后检验(每组重复次数)或配对 t 检验(重复次数与组无关)(pd=0.28)或平均组 RPE(分别为 7.8±0.8 vs 8.0±1.2;d=0.15)。相比之下,与传统的OL杠铃相比,使用SSB杠铃在相同参数下的RPE显著降低(pd=0.27)。在进行娱乐性深蹲练习时,阻力训练成年人在使用 OL 或 SSB 杠铃时表现出相似的峰值力和感知努力,但使用 OL 杠铃时可以达到更大的速度。对成年人进行多组深蹲训练以发展下半身力量和力量的练习者可以交替使用 OL 或 SSB 杠铃进行类似的力量训练,但使用 OL 杠铃进行速度训练的效果要好得多。