The Effects of a 12-week Block Periodization vs. Daily Undulating Periodization on Muscular Strength and Cognitive Function in Healthy Young Adults.
This study compared the effects of two resistance training periodization models, block periodization and daily undulating periodization, on muscular strength and force production in healthy young adults with limited resistance training experience. Participants were randomly assigned to a block periodization group, a daily undulating periodization group, or a non-training control group. The two training groups completed three supervised resistance training sessions per week for 12 weeks. Both training programs used the same exercises and were designed to have similar total training volume and average programmed relative intensity, but differed in how training volume and intensity were organized over time. Muscular strength and force production were assessed before and after the intervention using the isometric mid-thigh pull and single-joint isometric strength testing of the knee and elbow.
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Detailed Description
This was a randomized, controlled, parallel-group study designed to compare the effects of block periodization (BP) and daily undulating periodization (DUP) on maximal and rapid isometric force production in healthy young adults.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: block periodization, daily undulating periodization, or a non-training control group. The intervention lasted 12 weeks. Participants in both resistance training groups completed three supervised training sessions per week, for a total of 36 planned sessions.
The BP and DUP groups performed the same resistance exercises and were programmed to complete equivalent total training volume and similar average programmed relative intensity across the 12-week intervention. The principal difference between the groups was the temporal organization of training volume and intensity. In the BP group, training was organized into sequential three-week blocks emphasizing different loading characteristics. In the DUP group, loading variables were varied more frequently between training sessions within each weekly microcycle.
Before and after the 12-week intervention, participants completed assessments of muscular strength and force production. Maximal and rapid force production were assessed using the isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP), including peak force and force produced at 150, 200, and 250 milliseconds after contraction onset. Single-joint isometric strength of the knee flexors and extensors and elbow flexors and extensors was assessed using a Biodex System 4 Pro dynamometer. Body mass and body composition were also assessed.
The purpose of the study was to determine whether differences in the organization of resistance training, when exercise selection, total training volume, and average programmed relative intensity were controlled, resulted in different adaptations in maximal and rapid force production.In addition, cognitive function was assessed at the beginning and end of the 12-week intervention using the Stroop test.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Gdansk, Poland
- University of Physical Education and Sport
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria for the training group:
- 0-2,5 years of strength training experience
- between the ages of 18 and 35
- without chronic diseases that would preclude resistance training
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Other
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Block Periodization (BP)
Participants completed a 12-week supervised block-periodized resistance training program consisting of three training sessions per week. Training was organized into sequential three-week blocks with systematic changes in training volume and relative intensity. Exercise selection, total programmed training volume, and average programmed relative intensity across the intervention were matched to the Daily Undulating Periodization group. |
Participants completed a 12-week supervised block periodization resistance training program with three sessions per week. Training was organized into four consecutive three-week blocks. The programmed relative intensities across the four blocks were approximately 70%, 83%, 78%, and 90% of estimated 1RM, respectively, with corresponding changes in sets and repetitions. Exercise selection, total programmed training volume, and average programmed relative intensity across the 12-week intervention were matched to the Daily Undulating Periodization group. Loads were individually adjusted based on performance and repetitions in reserve (RIR).
Other Names:
|
|
Active Comparator: Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP)
Participants completed a 12-week supervised daily undulating resistance training program consisting of three training sessions per week. Training volume and relative intensity varied between training sessions within each weekly microcycle. Exercise selection, total programmed training volume, and average programmed relative intensity across the intervention were matched to the Block Periodization group. |
Participants completed a 12-week supervised daily undulating periodization resistance training program with three sessions per week. Training volume and relative intensity varied between sessions within each weekly microcycle, using loading conditions corresponding to approximately 70%, 78%, 83%, and 90% of estimated 1RM across the intervention. Exercise selection, total programmed training volume, and average programmed relative intensity across the 12-week intervention were matched to the Block Periodization group. Loads were individually adjusted based on performance and repetitions in reserve (RIR).
Other Names:
|
|
No Intervention: Control (CON)
Participants did not participate in the resistance training intervention and were instructed to maintain their usual physical activity throughout the 12-week study period. |
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
maximal and rapid force production characteristics derived from the IMTP, including net peak force and force expressed at 150-, 200-, and 250 ms
Time Frame: At the start and end of the 12-week intervention
|
At the start and end of the 12-week intervention
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Omega-3 assessments
Time Frame: At the beginning and at the end of the 12-week training period
|
Assessment of fatty acids: EPA, DHA; omega-3 index, AA/EPA, omega-6: omega-3 in erythrocytes of participants. |
At the beginning and at the end of the 12-week training period
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- AWFiS/2025_2_MK
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.