Impaired proprioception can provide faulty sensory feedback to the brain during movement, resulting in an increased risk of injury. Although several safety concerns about blood flow restricted exercise have been investigated, no research has observed how this exercise affects proprioception. Objectives: To investigate the effects of walking with and without practical blood flow restriction (pBFR) on muscle fatigue and knee proprioception. Design: Within-subject Randomized Crossover Design Methods: Fourteen healthy young adults (9 males and 5 females) walked on a treadmill at 5.6 km/h with a fixed grade for fifteen minutes either with or without elastic belts (using the moderate perceived tightness, “7 out of 10”). Absolute angular error of a standing position sense test (index of proprioception) and peak/average power outputs of countermovement jumps (index of fatigue) were measured before and immediately after exercise. Results: For absolute angular error, there was no evidence of a difference (BF10 = 0.64) between walking with and without pBFR [pBFR: Δ ‒ 1.5 ± 3.8 ˚ vs. Control: Δ 0.19 ± 3.8 ˚]. The change in peak power was not different (BF10 = 0.28) between conditions [pBFR: Δ ‒ 34.5 ± 1019 W vs. Control: Δ 150 ± 1616 W]. Similarly, the change in average power was also not different (BF10 = 0.28) between conditions [pBFR: Δ 9.1 ± 53 vs. Control: Δ ‒ 3.4 ± 73 W]. Conclusions: There was no evidence that walking with pBFR induced fatigue or impairment of knee proprioception, suggesting that walking with pBFR might be safely performed without increasing the risk of injury.

Objective: To analyse the acute effect of betaine supplementation on muscular endurance in weight training practitioners. Design: An experimental, crossover, randomized and double-blind study. Methods: The sample composed of 10 male subjects practicing resistance training (age: 23.71 ± 4.23 years old). Participants performed 2 sessions (i.e., Betaine x Placebo) with 3 sets of repetitions until failure with 70% of 1RM. The participants were provided 3 minutes of recovery between sets and 48 hours between sessions. The 24H food recall was evaluated before each exercise session. Results: There were no significant differences in carbohydrates (p = 0.732), protein (p = 0.684), fat (p = 0.271), or in total energy consumption (p = 0.865). A time effect occurred for the training session (F (2,18) = 54.626, p < 0.0001, η² = 0.859), with a linear reduction in the number of repetitions performed throughout the series for both conditions (1set > 2set > 3set). However, there was no interaction (F (2,18) = 0.625, p= 0.546, η² = 0.065) or condition effect (F(1,9) = 0.045, p = 0.837, η² = 0.005). Conclusion: Acute betaine supplementation had no effect on muscular endurance performance in the bench press.

Resistance training (RT) volume is considered a critical variable to induce neuromuscular adaptations (i.e., increased muscular strength). However, emerging findings have allowed us to revisit the role of volume in strength gains. Objectives: In the present study, we seek to present these emerging findings to discuss the role of RT volume in one-repetition maximum (1RM), isometric, and isokinetic strength gains. In addition, we propose alternative ways to test whether or not volume plays a determining role in strength adaptation. Design & methods: We reviewed the literature on RT volume and strength. In addition, we examined the RT literature to provide alternative ways to investigate the effect of volume on changes in strength. Results/conclusions: From the recent findings, we argue that an increase in strength can be achieved through a refined interaction between skill enhancement, regular use of high loads, and neuromuscular fatigue management; these points can be obtained from different RT volumes. From an inquiring point of view, we suggest that future investigations that aim to verify the effects of volume on muscular strength may consider the inclusion of high load sessions (80-100% of 1RM), periodically (e.g., every three or four weeks), in both low and high-volume groups, as well as considering the inclusion of different strength measures (e.g., isokinetic and isometric). We believe that this will help to clarify the nature of the relationship between RT volume and strength adaptations.

Within the literature examining the periodization of resistance training, “periodization” and “programming” are often confused and used interchangeably. This has resulted in the drawing of inferences regarding the efficacy of periodization from training studies comparing different programming models over short periods of time. As this conflation has become an area of scientific discussion, what was once referred to as “periodization” is now often referred to as “periodization programming” or “periodized programming.” Presumably, the use of the term “periodization programming” acknowledges the shortterm nature of a given research intervention. However, this term has never been explicitly defined in the scientific literature. Furthermore, it is unclear if “periodization programming” is actually a form of periodization. Objectives: To define “periodization programming” and to discuss its use within the literature. Design & Methods: Literature including the terms “periodization programming” and “periodized programming” were reviewed. Results: Deliberate manipulations in the volume and training load over the short-term seem to be defining characteristics of “periodization programming.” The resistance training methods employed by “periodization programming” studies share common ground such that they are structured in a manner resembling one stage of a block periodization model and are carried out alongside other stressors. Conclusions: “Periodization programming” studies are similar to previous studies employed to examine the concept of periodization and thus, may more accurately be investigating resistance training at the programming level. Without a formal definition, these studies may add to the confusion within the literature and further challenge the ability to draw inferences surrounding the efficacy of periodization.