Abstract:Abstract Background: The level of effort seems to play a key role in determining neuromuscular adaptations; however, less is known regarding the optimal dose-response for intra-set levels of effort on chronic resistance training (RT) adaptations. Objective: We aimed to synthesize the current literature on chronic RT adaptations in response to different intra-set velocity loss (VL) thresholds in the back squat exercise. We investigated changes in muscle strength, muscular endurance, sports-related physical performance, and muscle hypertrophy outcomes during resistance exercise to establish optimal dose-response relationships in physically active individuals.Methods: We conducted a literature search using PubMed (Medline), Web of ScienceTM, Scopus, and Cochrane up to April 2021, with no restriction on year of publication. The inclusion criteria were based on the PICO strategy. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed to determine the standardized mean differences (SMD ± 95% confidence intervals) for different intra-set VL thresholds (low VL [< 15%], moderate VL [≥ 15% and < 30%], and high VL [≥ 30%]) in RT on maximum muscular strength, bar velocity against submaximal loads, endurance against a given load, countermovement jump height, running sprint time, and muscle hypertrophy. Results: A total of 4,031 articles were found and 11 studies met our eligibility criteria. Pooled results revealed improvements between pre- and post-training intervention in 1RM strength (SMD = 0.78; p < 0.001); bar velocity outputs (light-loads [SMD = 0.79; p < 0.001] and heavy-loads [SMD = 2.08; p < 0.001]); endurance against a given load (SMD = 1.21; p < 0.001); countermovement jump height (SMD = 0.50; p < 0.001); running sprint time (SMD = - 0.28; p = 0.001); and muscle hypertrophy (SMD = 0.31; p = 0.05), with no significant difference between VL thresholds (p > 0.05). However, low VL elicited greater within-group SMD for 1RM strength than moderate and high VL thresholds (SMD = 0.93; 0.72; and 0.75; for low, moderate, and high VL thresholds, respectively). Low and moderate VL thresholds resulted in greater within-group SMD than high VL thresholds for velocity against light loads (SMD for low VL = 0.89; moderate VL = 0.90; high VL = 0.59); countermovement jump height (SMD for low VL = 0.51; moderate VL = 0.58; high VL = 0.36); and running sprint time (SMD for low VL = -0.49; moderate VL = -0.32; high VL = -0.09). Moderate and high VL thresholds induced higher within-group SMD for muscle hypertrophy than low VL (SMD for low VL = 0.14; moderate VL = 0.40; high VL = 0.44). Conclusions: Low to moderate VL thresholds may provide more effective and efficient training stimuli for improving performance in strength-power tasks, due to the similar or even greater chronic adaptations achieved compared with high VL, despite the lower number of repetitions performed during the RT program. Conversely, moderate to high VL may provide more favorable training stimuli for inducing muscle hypertrophy. Strength coaches may apply these dose-response trends to design optimal RT stimuli based on their specific training goals. Protocol registration: The study protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42020189321).

Early and mid-term outcomes of percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip®: comparative analysis of different EuroSCORE strata.

Impact of Low Volume Velocity-Controlled vs. Repetition to Failure Resistance Training Session on Measures of Explosive Performance in a Team of Adolescents Basketball Players

Effect of the movement speed of resistance training exercises on sprint and strength performance in concurrently training elite junior sprinters

The effects of different intra-set velocity loss thresholds on lower-limb adaptations to resistance training in young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Velocity-based resistance training: do women need greater velocity loss to maximize adaptations?

Effect of velocity loss during squat training on neuromuscular performance

Differences between adjusted vs. non-adjusted loads in velocity-based training: consequences for strength training control and programming

Comparison of Velocity-Based and Traditional Percentage-Based Loading Methods on Maximal Strength and Power Adaptations.

Effects of Variable Resistance Training within Complex Training on Neuromuscular Adaptations in Collegiate Basketball Players

Comparison of the effects of velocity-based vs. traditional resistance training methods on adaptations in strength, power, and sprint speed: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and quality of evidence appraisal

The effectiveness of adjusting resistance training loads through velocity-based techniques in experienced sprinters: a case series study

The effects of velocity-based versus percentage-based resistance training on athletic performances in sport-collegiate female basketball players

The effects of different velocity loss training protocols after 3 weeks of resistance training on muscular strength and power

The Effect of Heavy- Vs. Light-Load Jump Squats on the Development of Strength, Power, and Speed

The effects of velocity loss thresholds during resistance training on lower-limb performance enhancement: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Effects of velocity loss during resistance training on athletic performance, strength gains and muscle adaptations

Effects of Velocity-Based versus Percentage-Based Resistance Training on Explosive Neuromuscular Adaptations and Anaerobic Power in Sport-College Female Basketball Players

The Impact of Velocity-Based Training on Load-Velocity Relationships in Leg Press and Chest Press for Older Persons

Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players

Acute neuromuscular and hormonal responses to 20 versus 40% velocity loss in males and females before and after 8 weeks of velocity-loss resistance training

Velocity-Based Resistance Training on 1-RM, Jump and Sprint Performance: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials