Skip to content

Comparison of the musculoskeletal effects of different iso-inertial resistance training modalities: Flywheel vs. Electric-Motor

Functional and Structural effects of different iso-inertial resistance training modalities with eccentric overload in young, healthy, active males

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12618001323213
Enrollment
40
Registered
2018-08-06
Start date
2018-04-22
Completion date
2018-05-09
Last updated
2018-08-20

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

The aim was to analyze whether increasing the eccentric overload during resistance training in terms of range of motion and/or velocity using an electric-motor device, would induce different muscle adaptations than conventional flywheel eccentric overload resistance training. Despite the different eccentric overloads offered by each device, 6 weeks of resistance training using flywheel or electric-motor devices could induce different significant gains in strength, muscle power, vertical jump, and muscle mass.

Interventions

Forty healthy males participated in the study. They were randomly divided into 3 experimental training groups and 1 control group, which did not train. Participants in the training groups completed 6 weeks (12 sessions) of unilateral, flywheel, single-leg squat resistance exercise. In two of the groups, the resistance was generated by an electric-motor device, configured in iso-inertial mode, and employing two different velocities in the eccentric actions; 100% with respect to concentric speed (

Forty healthy males participated in the study. They were randomly divided into 3 experimental training groups and 1 control group, which did not train. Participants in the training groups completed 6 weeks (12 sessions) of unilateral, flywheel, single-leg squat resistance exercise. In two of the groups, the resistance was generated by an electric-motor device, configured in iso-inertial mode, and employing two different velocities in the eccentric actions; 100% with respect to concentric speed (experimental group 1; EX1), or 150% with respect to concentric speed (experimental group 2; EX2) (participantes were required to perform each concentric action at their own maximal speed; eccentric resistance is provided by the electric-motor device in base of the concentric speed, imitating a iso-inercial device). The third training group used a conventional flywheel device (experimental group 3; FW). Each training session consisted of 4 sets of 7 maximal concentric repetitions performed 2 times per week. Thigh muscle mass, unilateral maximal dynamic strength (1 repetition maximum; 1RM), bilateral and unilateral vertical jump performance, and unilateral muscle power at different percentages of 1RM were assessed approximately 1 week before and after the training period. Training protocols and tests were carried out by Sports Scientist and a Doctor.

Sponsors

University of León
Lead SponsorUniversity

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Open (masking not used)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
Male
Age
18 Years to 28 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

Men between 18 and 28 years Moderately active healthy individuals. Engaged in 6–8 h of recreational physical activity per week. Without history of regular lower limb strength training and no previous muscle joint or bone injury for the last 6 months.

Exclusion criteria

Muscle joint or bone injury for the last 6 months. Chronic pathologie. Less than 6 hours of physical active per week. Athletes.

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026