Crimson Publishers Publish With Us Reprints e-Books Video articles

Abstract

Open Journal of Cardiology & Heart Diseases

Do Static Contractions Result in Blood Pressure Levels Higher Than Dynamic Contractions in A Resistance Training?

Submission: February 16, 2018; Published: April 27, 2018

DOI: 10.31031/OJCHD.2018.01.000525

ISSN: 2578-0204
Volume1 Issue5

Abstract

Currently, athletes with the aim of improving their physical performance or even those into functional rehabilitation programs have had the benefits of resistance training (RT). The suitable adjustment of variables during their prescription, such as the type of muscle contraction, weight, and number of exercises repetitions and the recovering time between one set and another must be considered to achieve the aimed adaptations. Studies which have evaluated those variables about the impact on cardiovascular system have brought out some questions referring to changes in the kinds of contractions, dynamics or statics, on hemodynamic parameters. Comprehending the hemodynamics repercussions of those exercise modalities is determinant for a safe and efficient prescription. Therefore, the aim of this investigation is to compare the acute effects of dynamic and static sub maximal RT on the blood pressure of young beginner. The study included men, normotensives, practicing RT for at least 3 months. After determining the training load, the participants conducted two protocols of one-sided arm curls with 2-day interval among them: dynamic protocol (DP) and static protocol (SP). The values of their systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured before, during and after exercise. 28 participants were evaluated with 23±4 years old and BMI of 24±2.8kg/m2. The averages of the SBP before, during and after the DP and SP protocols were respectively 127mmHg (±10.6), 140mmHg (±11.6), 128mmHg (±10.7) e 130mmHg (±9.7), 135mmHg (±17.9), 123mmHg (±12.3). The averages of the DBP before, during and after the DP and SP protocols were respectively 69mmHg (±10.3), 76mmHg (±7.9), 72mmHg (±5.8) e 69mmHg (±8.8), 73mmHg (±8.0), 71mmHg (±9.9), where there were no significant statistical differences (p >0.05). Thus, there were no differences between the SBP and DBP values on the tested protocols.

Keywords: Resistance training; Blood pressure; Isometric contraction; Isotonic contraction

Get access to the full text of this article