Optimizing Resistance Training Outcomes: Comparing In-Person Supervision, Online Coaching, and Self-Guided Approaches: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Simon Gavanda, Steffen Held, Sascha Schrey, Katharina Oberwetter, Pier-Gino M Lazzaro, Markus Pergelt, Stephan Geisler
{"title":"Optimizing Resistance Training Outcomes: Comparing In-Person Supervision, Online Coaching, and Self-Guided Approaches: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Simon Gavanda, Steffen Held, Sascha Schrey, Katharina Oberwetter, Pier-Gino M Lazzaro, Markus Pergelt, Stephan Geisler","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Gavanda, S, Held, S, Schrey, S, Oberwetter, K, Lazzaro, P-GM, Pergelt, M, and Geisler, S. Optimizing resistance training outcomes: comparing in-person supervision, online coaching, and self-guided approaches: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This randomized, parallel-group trial investigated the effects of supervised (SUP), app-guided (APP), and self-guided (PDF) 10-week, thrice-weekly full-body resistance training (RT) on strength, body composition, well-being, and supervision satisfaction (S-SRQ) in trained men and women (n = 79, 48% women; 30.7 ± 7.8 years, 1.75 ± 0.1 m, 77.5 ± 17.5 kg). Adherence was highest in SUP (88.2%), followed by APP (81.2%) and PDF (52.2%). At p ≤ 0.05, body mass (+1.8 ± 1.9 kg, p = 0.006) and fat-free mass (+1.4 ± 0.9 kg, p ≤ 0.001) increased significantly in SUP. Muscle mass gains were observed in SUP (+1.4 ± 0.9 kg, p = 0.009) and PDF (+0.9 ± 1.3 kg, p = 0.047). All groups improved squat 1-repetition maximum (1RM) (SUP: +26.6 ± 6.5 kg, p ≤ 0.001; APP: +19.2 ± 11.0 kg, p ≤ 0.001; PDF: +19.4 ± 11.7 kg, p ≤ 0.001) and bench press 1RM (SUP: +9.1 ± 3.5 kg, p ≤ 0.001; APP: +8.2 ± 4.0 kg, p ≤ 0.001; PDF: +7.7 ± 5.8 kg, p ≤ 0.001). Supervised showed significantly greater squat gains than APP and PDF (p ≤ 0.044). Well-being (WHO-5) improved in SUP (+15.7 ± 16.2 points, p ≤ 0.001) and PDF (+9.0 ± 20.4 points, p = 0.032). Satisfaction with supervision was significantly higher in SUP (96.7 ± 4.3%) than in APP (92.0 ± 7.1%, p = 0.005). In conclusion, supervised RT resulted in superior improvements in strength, body composition, well-being, and supervision satisfaction compared with app-guided or self-guided training. Although APP and PDF resulted in some positive effects, their magnitude was generally smaller. These findings underscore the value of in-person coaching in optimizing RT outcomes. However, app-based RT shows promise for maintaining adherence, offering a viable alternative when full supervision is not feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005216","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Gavanda, S, Held, S, Schrey, S, Oberwetter, K, Lazzaro, P-GM, Pergelt, M, and Geisler, S. Optimizing resistance training outcomes: comparing in-person supervision, online coaching, and self-guided approaches: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This randomized, parallel-group trial investigated the effects of supervised (SUP), app-guided (APP), and self-guided (PDF) 10-week, thrice-weekly full-body resistance training (RT) on strength, body composition, well-being, and supervision satisfaction (S-SRQ) in trained men and women (n = 79, 48% women; 30.7 ± 7.8 years, 1.75 ± 0.1 m, 77.5 ± 17.5 kg). Adherence was highest in SUP (88.2%), followed by APP (81.2%) and PDF (52.2%). At p ≤ 0.05, body mass (+1.8 ± 1.9 kg, p = 0.006) and fat-free mass (+1.4 ± 0.9 kg, p ≤ 0.001) increased significantly in SUP. Muscle mass gains were observed in SUP (+1.4 ± 0.9 kg, p = 0.009) and PDF (+0.9 ± 1.3 kg, p = 0.047). All groups improved squat 1-repetition maximum (1RM) (SUP: +26.6 ± 6.5 kg, p ≤ 0.001; APP: +19.2 ± 11.0 kg, p ≤ 0.001; PDF: +19.4 ± 11.7 kg, p ≤ 0.001) and bench press 1RM (SUP: +9.1 ± 3.5 kg, p ≤ 0.001; APP: +8.2 ± 4.0 kg, p ≤ 0.001; PDF: +7.7 ± 5.8 kg, p ≤ 0.001). Supervised showed significantly greater squat gains than APP and PDF (p ≤ 0.044). Well-being (WHO-5) improved in SUP (+15.7 ± 16.2 points, p ≤ 0.001) and PDF (+9.0 ± 20.4 points, p = 0.032). Satisfaction with supervision was significantly higher in SUP (96.7 ± 4.3%) than in APP (92.0 ± 7.1%, p = 0.005). In conclusion, supervised RT resulted in superior improvements in strength, body composition, well-being, and supervision satisfaction compared with app-guided or self-guided training. Although APP and PDF resulted in some positive effects, their magnitude was generally smaller. These findings underscore the value of in-person coaching in optimizing RT outcomes. However, app-based RT shows promise for maintaining adherence, offering a viable alternative when full supervision is not feasible.

优化阻力训练结果:比较现场监督、在线指导和自我指导方法:一项随机对照试验。
摘要:Gavanda, S, Held, S, Schrey, S, Oberwetter, K, Lazzaro, P-GM, Pergelt, M, Geisler, S.优化阻力训练效果:现场监督、在线指导和自我指导方法的比较:一项随机对照试验。这项随机、平行组试验研究了监督(SUP)、应用程序指导(APP)和自我指导(PDF)的10周、每周三次全身阻力训练(RT)对训练过的男性和女性的力量、身体成分、幸福感和监督满意度(S-SRQ)的影响(n = 79,女性48%;30.7±7.8岁,1.75±0.1米,77.5±17.5公斤)。依从性最高的是SUP(88.2%),其次是APP(81.2%)和PDF(52.2%)。在p≤0.05时,SUP组体质量(+1.8±1.9 kg, p = 0.006)和无脂质量(+1.4±0.9 kg, p≤0.001)显著增加,肌肉质量(+1.4±0.9 kg, p = 0.009)和PDF组(+0.9±1.3 kg, p = 0.047)显著增加。各组深蹲1次重复最大(1RM)均有改善(SUP: +26.6±6.5 kg, p≤0.001;APP: +19.2±11.0 kg, p≤0.001;PDF: +19.4±11.7 kg, p≤0.001)和卧推机1RM (SUP: +9.1±3.5 kg, p≤0.001;APP: +8.2±4.0 kg, p≤0.001;PDF: +7.7±5.8 kg, p≤0.001)。Supervised组的深蹲增益显著大于APP组和PDF组(p≤0.044)。幸福感(WHO-5)在SUP(+15.7±16.2分,p≤0.001)和PDF(+9.0±20.4分,p = 0.032)方面均有改善。SUP组对监护的满意度(96.7±4.3%)显著高于APP组(92.0±7.1%,p = 0.005)。总之,与应用程序指导或自我指导训练相比,监督RT在力量,身体成分,幸福感和监督满意度方面取得了更大的改善。APP和PDF虽有一定的积极作用,但其作用幅度普遍较小。这些发现强调了面对面指导在优化RT结果方面的价值。然而,基于应用程序的RT显示出保持依从性的希望,在完全监督不可行的情况下提供了一个可行的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信