Effect of range of motion on muscle strength and thickness

• Published in: Journal of strength and conditioning research Vol. 26; no. 8; p. 2140
• Main Authors: Pinto, Ronei S, Gomes, Naiara, Radaelli, Régis, Botton, Cíntia E, Brown, Lee E, Bottaro, Martim
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2012
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Elbow - diagnostic imaging; Elbow - physiology; Humans; Male; Muscle Strength - physiology; Muscle, Skeletal - anatomy & histology; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology; Organ Size; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology; Resistance Training; Ultrasonography; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1064-8011; 1533-4287
• DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823a3b15

The purpose of this investigation was to compare partial range-of-motion vs. full range-of-motion upper-body resistance training on strength and muscle thickness (MT) in young men. Volunteers were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (a) full range of motion (FULL; n = 15), (b) partial range of motion (PART; n = 15), or (c) control (CON; n = 10). The subjects trained 2 d · wk(-1) for 10 weeks in a periodized program. Primary outcome measures included elbow flexion maximal strength measured by 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and elbow flexors MT measured by ultrasound. The results indicated that elbow flexion 1RM significantly increased (p < 0.05) for the FULL (25.7 ± 9.6%) and PART groups (16.0 ± 6.7%) but not for the CON group (1.7 ± 5.5%). Also, FULL 1RM strength was significantly greater than the PART 1RM after the training period. Average elbow flexor MT significantly increased for both training groups (9.65 ± 4.4% for FULL and 7.83 ± 4.9 for PART). These data suggest that muscle strength and MT can be improved with both FULL and PART resistance training, but FULL may lead to greater strength gains.