91
Journal of Exercise Physiologyonline
June 2015
Volume 18 Number 3
Editor-in-Chief
Official Research Journal of
Tommy
the American
Boone, PhD,
Society
MBA
of
Review
Board
Exercise
Physiologists
Todd Astorino, PhD
Julien Baker,
ISSN 1097-9751
PhD
Steve Brock, PhD
Lance Dalleck, PhD
Eric Goulet, PhD
Robert Gotshall, PhD
Alexander Hutchison, PhD
M. Knight-Maloney, PhD
Len Kravitz, PhD
James Laskin, PhD
Yit Aun Lim, PhD
Lonnie Lowery, PhD
Derek Marks, PhD
Cristine Mermier, PhD
Robert Robergs, PhD
Chantal Vella, PhD
Dale Wagner, PhD
Frank Wyatt, PhD
Ben Zhou, PhD
Official Research Journal
of the American Society of
Exercise Physiologists
ISSN 1097-9751
JEPonline
Multi-Joint and Single-Joint Exercise Performance
and Perceived Exertion with Several Different
Recoveries
Gilmar Senna1,2, Estevão Scudese2,3, Felipe Carneiro2, Juliana
Torres2, Cristiano Queiroz4, Estélio Dantas1,2
1Nursing
and Biosciences Post-Graduation Program, Doctorate of
Federal University of State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2Biosciences
Laboratory of Human Movement, Tiradentes University, Brazil,
3School of Physical Education and Sports, Federal University of
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 4Health Center Science, Catholic of
Petrópolis University, Brazil
ABSTRACT
Senna G, Scudese E, Carneiro F, Torres J, Queiroz C, Dantas
E. Multi-Joint and Single-Joint Exercise Performance and
Perceived Exertion with Several Different Recoveries. JEPonline
2015;18(3):91-100. The purpose of this study was to compare
repetition performance and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) with
different rest periods for multi-joint and single-joint exercises.
Fourteen trained men (20.93 ± 2.40 yrs; 75.23 ± 9.37 kg; 176.64 ±
7.53 cm; 24.03 ± 1.62 kg·m-2) completed 8 sessions with 3 sets of
10 RM loads. Barbell bench press (BP) or machine chest fly (MCF)
were alternated (one each day) with different rest periods for each
day (1-min, 2-min, 3-min, or 5-min). The results indicated that the
shorter rest length presented greater reductions in repetition
number for the BP (1-min < 2-min < 3-min, P≤0.0001), but no
differences were observed between the 3-min and the 5-min rest
conditions. For MCF, significant differences were evidenced for
rest periods of 1-min, 2-min, and 3-min compared to 5 -(P≤0.0001).
No significant differences were found between 1-min, 2-min, and 3min. Both exercises presented progressive declines in repetition
performance over consecutive sets. Increases in RPE were evident
over the course of the consecutive sets for both exercises, with
significant exertion values at the lower smaller rest conditions. In
conclusion, the findings indicate that both exercises presented
similar patterns in repetition performance and RPE.
Key Words: Muscle Strength, Weight Lifting, Physical Fitness
92
INTRODUCTION
According to the American College of Sports Medicine (1), the rest interval between sets can
influence the outcome of resistance training programs. The most recent position statement (1),
indicates that when emphasis is placed on strength development, power or hypertrophy, a 2-min to
3-min rest period is recommended for multi-joint exercises and recoveries of 1-min to 2-min
between sets seems to be sufficient for single-joint exercises. Recently, several experiments have
demonstrated that different rest lengths could promote distinct repetition performance for multiple
sets of multi-joint exercises or over the course of a training session (7,11-15,17-19).
However, after a rigorous search, the authors found few studies that verified the influence of rest
interval length between sets for multi-joint and single-joint exercises (14,15). Of these studies, the
authors have observed similar patterns over the reduction of repetition number in multi-joint and
single-joint exercises, regardless of the rest length investigated. Additionally, Senna et al. (15)
observed lower elevations in blood lactate concentrations caused by long intervals between sets
for single-joint exercise. Further, the perceived exertion (RPE) values were significantly increased
over successive sets for both the multi-joint and single-joint exercises with significantly greater
values for the 1-min rest condition (14,15).
However, given the current recommendations, there is little credible evidence regarding the 2-min
rest length window especially for multi-joint and single-joint exercises in regards to repetition
performance (14,15). This specific length (2-min) appears to be fundamental effort to consolidate
the current rest recommendation (1). In addition to the importance of adding to the current body of
knowledge for future recommendations, the purpose of this study was to compare the repetition
performance and RPE with 1-min, 2-min, 3-min, and 5-min rest intervals between sets for multijoint and single-joint exercises. We hypothesized that multi-joint and single-joint exercises would
reveal a similar pattern of repetitions performance output and RPE values.
METHODS
Subjects
Fourteen trained men (20.93 ± 2.40 yrs; 75.23 ± 9.37 kg; 176.64 ± 7.53 cm; 24.03 ± 1.62 kg·m-2;
relative strength in BP: 1.57 ± 0.30 kg·kg-1 body mass) participated in the study. All subjects
indicated that they had 1-yr experience in resistance training with a minimum of 3 times·wk-1
frequency. Also, each subject confirmed the absence of any medical condition that could influence
the training program. None was using anabolic-androgenic steroids, ergogenic substances or
drugs that could influence the subject’s exercise performance. In addition, the subjects were
instructed to avoid regular physical activity during the study period. Before data collection, all
subjects responded negatively to the PAR-Q (16). The experimental procedure was approved by
the Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Anthropometric variables and
body composition were taken to determine the subjects’ height (cm) and weight (kg) for calculation
of body mass index (BMI-weight/stature²), using a digital scale, Filizola, model PL 180 (Brazil) with
accuracy of 0.01 kg and a stadiometer accurate to 0.1 cm, Sanny, model ES 2020 (Brazil). All
procedures followed the recommendations of the International Society for the Advancement of
Kinanthropometry (6).
Ten Repetition Maximum
After two familiarization sessions (similar to the test procedures), the 10 RM load was assessed for
all subjects over four non-consecutive days with a randomized design. At the first-day, the subjects
performed the 10 RM test for the bench press exercise (BP). During the second visit, the subjects
93
performed the 10 RM test on the machine chest fly (MCF). Two addition visits with similar
procedures were necessary to determine the reproducibility of the 10 RM. For all testing sessions,
each subject performed a maximum of three attempts for each exercise with 10 RM loads and 5
min of rest between attempts. The greatest load successfully lifted between the two testing visits
was considered as the 10 RM value. Standard techniques were used for each exercise (2).
To minimize errors in data collection, the following conditions were followed: (a) standardized
instructions concerning testing procedures were given to the subjects; (b) all subjects were
properly instructed on the techniques for each exercise; (c) body position was held constant; (d)
verbal encouragement was provided during all testing procedures; and (e) mass of all free weights
and barbell were determined using a precision scale.
Experimental Procedures
Seventy-two hrs after the last 10 RM test, the subjects completed the first of eight different
experimental sessions (2 sessions·wk-1). For each visit, 3 sets with 10 RM loads were performed
on a random cross-over design in order to determine the exercise (BP or MCF) in combination with
a given rest length (1-min, 2-min, 3-min, or 5-min) implemented for each experimental session.
The warm-up before each exercise consisted of 2 sets of 12 repetitions with 40% of 10 RM loads.
A recovery time of 3-min was allowed between the warm-up and the experimental procedure. The
subjects were verbally encouraged to perform 3 sets until volitional exhaustion. No attempt was
made to control the repetition velocity, however, the subjects were told to use a smooth, controlled
movement. All visits were conducted at the same time of day in order to avoid any circadian
accumulation effects. The number of repetitions and the RPE (verified by Omni Res Scale) were
recorded to each set for purposes of later interpretation (4,5).
Statistical Analysis
The number of repetitions was presented by mean ± standard deviation (SD) and by the median
for Omni Res Scale (RPE). An intra-class correlation coefficient was used for verify the load
reproducibility between 10 RM tests and retest sessions. The ANOVA (one-way) for repeated
measures was used to analyze repetitions performance data between sets and between different
rest conditions for each exercise. When necessary, a Bonferroni post-hoc test was applied for pairwise comparisons. Additionally, to determine the magnitude of the findings, Effect Sizes (ESs)
were calculated for each exercise set of each rest condition. The thresholds proposed by Cohen
(3) were applied to determine the magnitude of the treatment effects. The Friedman test was used
to detect differences in relation to RPE between sets and rest intervals conditions. When
necessary, a Dunn post-hoc was implemented for pair-wise comparisons. The level of significance
was set at P<0.05. Statistical software 10.0 version was used for statistical analyze (Statsoft, Inc,
Tulsa, OK, USA).
RESULTS
Excellent reproducibility for 10 RM loads was observed between test and retest in both exercises
(BP, r = 0.97; MCF, r = 0.94; P<0.0001). For BP, 1-min rest protocol resulted in significant
reductions for the total number of repetitions compared with the other rest conditions (2-min, 3min, and 5-min; P<0.002). Similarly, the 2-min protocol showed important decreases in total
repetition number when compared with the longer 3-min and 5-min rest intervals (P<0.0001).
However, no differences were identified between the 3-min and the 5-min rest conditions. For
MCF, 1-min, 2-min, and 3-min of rest triggered significant reductions at the total number of
repetitions compared to the longer 5-min rest condition (P<0.0001). Repetitions values per set and
the total number of repetitions for both exercises for each rest protocol are presented in Table 1.
94
Figures 1 and 2 represent the curve pattern of reductions in the number of repetitions of each set
different conditions in the interval exercises multi-joint and single-joint exercises, respectively.
Table 1. Number of Repetition in Each Set and the Total Number of Repetitions with
1-Min, 2-Min, 3-Min, and 5-Min Rest Intervals. Data are means ± standard deviation.
Exercise and Rest
Conditions
Bench Press
1-min
2-min
3-min
5-min
Machine Chest Fly
1-min
2-min
3-min
5-min
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Total Number of
Repetitions
10.07 ± 0.26
10.71 ± 1.13
10.21 ± 0.57
10.14 ± 0.36
7.00 ± 1.11*§‡
8.07 ± 1.14*
9.36 ± 0.93
9.42 ± 0.75
5.21 ± 1.12*†§‡
6.43 ± 1.22*†‡
8.07 ± 0.92*†
8.50 ± 0.65*†
22.28 ± 1.12#§‡
25.21 ± 2.86§‡
27.64 ± 1.86
28.07 ± 1.31
10.57 ± 0.93
10.28 ± 0.61
10.21 ± 0.69
10.50 ± 0.65
7.35 ± 1.01*‡
8.35 ± 1.27*
8.35 ± 1.08*
9.85 ± 0.66
5.86 ± 0.66 *†‡
6.35 ± 1.39*†‡
7.21 ± 1.05*†‡
9.50 ± 1.09*
23.78 ± 1.25‡
25.00 ± 2.85‡
25.78 ± 2.45‡
29.85 ± 1.95
Values are Expressed in Repetition maximum (RM). *Significant difference compared with set 1;
†Significant difference compared with set 2; #Significant difference compared with 2-min; §Significant
difference compared with 3-min; ‡Significant difference compared with 5-min.
Figure 1. Number of Repetitions in Each Set with Rest Intervals for Bench Press of 1-Min, 2Min, 3-Min, and 5-Min. *Significant difference compared with Set 1; †Significant difference
compared with Set 2; #Significant difference compared with 2-min (P<0.05); §Significant difference
compared with 3-min (P<0.05); ‡Significant difference compared with 5-min (P<0.05).
95
Figure 2. Number of Repetitions in Each Set with 1-Min, 2-Min, 3-Min, and 5-Min Rest
Intervals for Machine Chest Fly. *Significant difference compared with Set 1; †Significant
difference compared with Set 2; #Significant difference compared with 2-min (P<0.05); §Significant
difference compared with 3-min (P<0.05); ‡Significant difference compared with 5-min (P<0.05).
The effect size data presented large magnitude for repetition reduction on both exercises and rest
conditions (Table 2). The magnitude of reductions was more evident over the completion of the
consecutive sets for all exercises in all rest interval conditions.
Table 2. Effect Size from the Second Set of Each Exercise with the 1-Min, 2-Min, 3-Min,
and 5-Min Rest Intervals.
Exercise and Rest Conditions
Bench Press
1-Min
2-Min
3-Min
5-Min
Machine Chest Fly
1-Min
2-Min
3-Min
5-Min
Set 2
Set 3
3.42 (large)
1.22 (large)
0.80 (large)
1.98 (large)
5.02 (large)
2.48 (large)
1.23 (large)
1.53 (large)
3.42 (large)
3.15 (large)
2.65 (large)
0.98 (large)
5.02 (large)
6.42 (large)
4.29 (large)
1.53 (large)
For the RPE data, significant increases were observed over the course of sets completion
independently of the exercise modality. Moreover, higher values were found for the 1-min and the
96
2-min rest intervals starting as soon as the second set for the BP exercise (Table 2). For all other
rest conditions in both exercises, significant values in RPE were evident only at last set.
Table 3. Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) for Each Set and Exercise for 1-Min, 3-Min,
5-Min Rest Interval (Median).
Exercise and Rest Conditions
Bench press
1-Min
2-Min
3-Min
5-Min
Machine Chest Fly
1-Min
2-Min
3-Min
5-Min
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
7
6.5
6
6
7.5*
7*
7
7
8*‡
8*
8*
7*
6
6
6
6
7
6.5
6
6
8*†‡
8*†
7*
7*
*Significant difference to set 1; †Significant difference to set 2; ‡Significant difference to 5-min rest interval.
DISCUSSION
The findings in this study indicate that with regards to multi-joint BP exercise, longer rest periods
(such as 3-min and 5-min) promote better consistency and a higher number of repetitions when
compared with the shorter intervals (such as the 1-min and 2-min rest periods). Also, in regards to
the MCF exercise, the 1-min, 2-min, and 3-min rest intervals resulted in significant reductions in
total number of repetitions compared with the 5-min rest period. As to RPE, significant increases
were shown over the succession of sets independent of the exercise modality. These findings can
contribute for future recommendations due to the scarce multiple rest comparisons performed
between multi-joint and single-joint exercises (BP and MCF).
The American College of Sports Medicine (1) recommends a minimum of a 2-min to 3-min
recovery between sets for multi-joint exercises and a minimum of 1-min to 2-min rest between sets
for single-joint exercise. However, our data do not support the ACSM statement due to the very
similar performance reduction pattern that we found on repetition number for both exercises
modalities (multi-joint and single-joint). While ACSM recommends the 2-min rest condition when
the goal is the development of strength or hypertrophy (1), the present study showed dramatic
performance reductions with 2-min of recovery between sets for both exercises (multi-joint and
single-joint exercise).
Number of Repetitions
Recently, only two studies investigated the influence of different rest intervals between sets for
multi-joint and single-joint exercises (14,15). Senna et al. (14) compared repetition performance
between multi-joint and single-joint exercises and analyzed the same muscles (pectoralis major
and quadriceps femoris) for both methods. Fifteen trained men completed 12 sessions (4
exercises x 3 rest intervals). Each session consisted of 5 sets of 10 RM loads for the BP, leg
97
press, MCF, and leg extension exercises with 1-min, 3-min, and 5-min rest periods between sets.
The results indicated a significantly higher value with 3-min and 5-min versus 1-min between sets
for the BP. No significant differences were evident between 3-min and 5-min rest conditions. For
other exercises (i.e., leg press, MCF, and machine leg extension), significant differences were
reported between all rest conditions (1-min < 3-min < 5-min). For all exercises, consistent
decreases in repetition performance (relative to the first set) were observed for all rest conditions,
starting early from the second set for 1-min rest condition and late by the third set for the 3-min
and 5-min rest periods.
Senna et al. (15) compared the influence of different rests on multi-joint and single-joint exercises
on repetition performance, perceived exertion, and blood lactate. All subjects completed four
different experimental sessions. During each session, five sets of each exercise were executed
with 10 RM loads to failure with the 1-min or 3-min rest interval. The authors found that 3-min rest
protocol promoted greater total number of repetitions for BP and MCF compared to the shorter 1min rest condition. Regarding the RPE, progressive elevations occurred after the third set of all
conditions tested. For blood lactate concentrations, the multi-joint exercise (BP) elicited significant
elevations immediately after and 15 min post-exercise compared to the baseline condition for both
rest conditions (1-min and 3-min). As for the single-joint exercise (MCF), the authors found higher
blood lactate values with the 1-min rest interval compared to the 3-min rest interval.
The studies conducted by Senna et al. (14,15) partially corroborate the findings in the current
study due to the similar pattern of repetitions performance found for different exercises with either
the 1-min, 3-min, and 5-min recovery. Several rest periods were verified (1-min, 2-min, 3-min, and
5-min) and no important differences were observed in the performance patterns between both
exercises (BC and MCF). However, we did found that the 3-min rest condition did not trigger a
significant reduction in total number of repetitions for the single-joint exercise, which contrasted
with Senna et al. (14,15). This outcome might have occurred due to the accumulated fatigue effect
found by the previous 5 set protocol compared to the much shorter 3 set protocol from the current
investigation.
Several other previous studies focused on analyzing distinct rest periods on multi-joint exercises
(8-12,17-19). The majority of these investigations found significant reductions in performance for
several different recovery times (i.e., 1-min, 2-min, 3-min, and 5-min). For instance, Ratamess et
al. (9) examined the effects of different rest periods on intensity, volume, and metabolic responses
in the BP exercise. Eight trained men performed 10 randomized protocols with 5 BP sets at 75%
or 85% of 1 RM for 10 repetitions and 5 repetitions, respectively. The authors then implemented
several rest periods between sets (30-sec, 1-min, 2-min, 3-min, and 5-min) and found that the 30sec and 1-min rest periods resulted in 15 to 55% reductions in the subjects’ intensity and volume
(fifth < fourth < third < second < first set). For the 2-min rest period, the performance was
maintained during the first and second sets, but decrease 8 to 29% from the third, fourth, and fifth
sets. For the 3-min rest period, a volume reduction was noted in the fourth and fifth sets, (~21%
lower than the first, second, and third sets). At 5-min, a reduction was observed only for the final
fifth set. The authors found that the greatest reductions in performance occurred with the shortest
recoveries and performance was maintained during third to fourth sets when a longer 3-min to 5min rest period was conducted. These data are in accordance with the overall result of the present
study when taking into account the multi-joint exercise outcomes. Moreover, a very similar pattern
was found for the single-joint exercise, allowing for the observation of the same performance
pattern between exercise modalities.
98
Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
The use of RPE to check the relative intensity of resistance exercise (4,5) has been shown to be
helpful in understanding metabolic work of consecutive sets for the short 1-min rest interval for
both multi-joint and single-joint exercises (14,15). In agreement with the earlier work, we found a
significant increase in RPE values with consecutive sets for both multi-joint and single-joint
exercise with significantly increased values for the shorter 1-min and 2-min rest conditions
independently of the exercise mode (BC and MCF). Thus, short rest periods of 1-min and 2-min
appears to enhance anaerobic glycolysis to compensate for the incomplete phosphocreatine
resynthesis. The resulting feedback from this biochemical reaction may have an affect the muscle
nociceptors with increased soreness sensation and effort perception (4,5).
CONCLUSIONS
The ability to maintain a high training intensity and volume is very important for strength
development. Coaches and trainers must comprehend and apply scientific knowledge regarding
the correct manipulation of resistance training variables in order to achieve specific goals
throughout the sessions. The present study brings new understanding regarding rest interval and
enhances the tools for professionals to manipulate this variable in order to achieve different
training goals, directly affecting the number of repetitions during consecutive sets for both multi
and single-joint exercises. These results indicate that repetition performance can be significantly
affected and present reduced values by implementing shorter rest periods independently of the
multi-joint and single-joint exercise modality. Although, the ideal rest between sets for multi-joint
and single-joint exercise is still a controversial theme in the literature, we strongly recommend
more studies that further investigate the relationships between different rest intervals on multi-joint
and single-joint exercise on hormonal, metabolic and neural responses to better understand the
associated phenomena as well as the pursuit of the optimal rest period length to achieve different
training goals (i.e., strength and hypertrophy).
Address for correspondence: Gilmar Senna, Federal University of State of Rio de Janeiro,
Xavier Sigaud, 290/401, Praia Vermelha, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 22290-180. Email:
sennagw@gmail.com.
REFERENCES
1. American College of Sports Medicine. Position stand on progression models in resistance
exercise for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41:687-708.
2. Baechle TR, Earle RW. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. (2nd Edition).
Champaing, IL: Human Kinetics, 2000.
3. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. (2nd Edition).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
4. Lagally KM, Amorose AJ, Rock B. Selection of resistance exercise intensity using ratings of
perceived exertion from the OMNI-RES. Percept Mot Skills. 2009;108:573-586.
99
5. Lagally KM, Robertson RJ. Construct validity of the OMNI resistance exercise scale. J
Strength Cond Res. 2006;20:252-256.
6. Marfell-Jones M, Olds T, Stewart A, Carter J. International
Anthropometric Assessment. Underdale: ISAK: Potchefstroom, 2006
Standards
for
7. Miranda H, Fleck SJ, Simão R, Barreto AC, Dantas EHM, Novaes J. Effect of two different
rest period lengths on the number of repetitions performed during resistance training. J
Strength Cond Res. 2007;21:1032-1036.
8. Rahimi R. Effect of different rest intervals on the exercise volume completed during squat
bouts. J Sports Sci Med. 2005;4:361-366.
9. Ratamess NA, Falvo MJ, Mangine GT, Hoffman JR, Faigenbaum AD, Kang J. The effect
rest interval length on metabolic responses to the bench press exercise. Eur J Appl
Physiol. 2007;100:1-17.
10. Ratamess NA, Chiarello CM, Sacco AJ, Hoffman JR, Faigenbaum AD, Ross RE, Kang J.
The effects of rest interval length on acute bench press performance: The influence of
gender and muscle strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26:1817-1826.
11. Rodrigues B, Rodrigues A, Sandy D, Mazini M, Dantas E. The effect of two different rest
intervals on the number of repetitions in a training session. Serb J Sports Sci. 2012a;(6):
37-41.
12. Scudese E, Willardson JM, Simão R, Senna G, Freitas de Salles B, Miranda H. The effect
of rest interval length on repetition consistency and perceived exertion during near maximal
loaded bench press sets. J Strength Cond Res. 2013.
13. Senna G, de Salles BF, Prestes J, Mello RA, Simão R. Influence of two different rest
interval lengths in resistance training sessions for upper and lower body. J Sports Sci Med.
2009;8:197-202.
14. Senna G, Willardson JM, de Salles BF, Scudese E, Carneiro F, Palma A, Simão R. The
effect of rest interval length on multi- and single-joint exercise performance and perceived
exertion. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:57-62.
15. Senna GW, Figueiredo T, Scudese E, Baffi M, Carneiro F, Moraes E, Miranda H, Simão R.
Influence of different rest interval length in multi-joint and single-joint exercises on repetition
performance, perceived exertion, and blood lactate. JEPonline. 2012;15(5):96-106.
16. Shephard RJ. PAR-Q, Canadian home fitness test and exercise screening alternatives.
Sports Med. 1988;5:185-195.
17. Willardson JM, Burkett LN. A comparison of 3 different rest intervals on the exercise volume
completed during a workout. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:23-26.
18. Willardson JM, Burkett LN. The effect of rest interval length on bench press performance
with heavy versus light loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2006a;20:400-403.
100
19. Willardson JM, Burkett LN. The effect of rest interval length on the sustainability of squat
and bench press repetitions. J Strength Cond Res. 2006b;20:396-399.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in JEPonline are those of the authors and are not attributable to
JEPonline, the editorial staff or the ASEP organization.