4.5 Article

The effect of Nordic hamstring exercise training volume on biceps femoris long head architectural adaptation

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages 1775-1783

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/sms.13085

Keywords

eccentric training; fascicle length; muscle architecture; ultrasound

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to determine the time course of architectural adaptations in the biceps femoris long head (BFLH) following high or low volume eccentric training. Twenty recreationally active males completed a two week standardized period of eccentric Nordic hamstring exercise (NHE) training, followed by fourweeks of high (n=10) or low volume (n=10) training. Eccentric strength was assessed pre- and post intervention and following detraining. Architecture was assessed weekly during training and after two and fourweeks of detraining. After sixweeks of training, BFLH fascicles increased significantly in the high (23%+/- 7%, P<.001, d=2.87) and low volume (24%+/- 4%, P<.001, d=3.46) groups, but reversed following twoweeks of detraining (high volume: -17%+/- 5%, P<.001, d=-2.04; low volume: -15%+/- 3%, P<.001, d=-2.56) after completing the intervention. Both groups increased eccentric strength after sixweeks of training (high volume: 28%+/- 20%, P=.009, d=1.55; low volume: 34%+/- 14%, P<.001, d=2.09) and saw no change in strength following a four week period of detraining (high volume: -7%+/- 7%, P=.97, d=-0.31; low volume: -2%+/- 5%, P=.99, d=-0.20). Both low and high volume NHE training stimulate increases in BFLH fascicle length and eccentric knee flexor strength. Architectural adaptations reverted to baseline levels within twoweeks after ceasing training, but eccentric strength was maintained for at least fourweeks. These observations provide novel insight into the effects of training volume and detraining on BFLH architecture and may provide guidance for the implementation of NHE programs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available