Muscle Development, Muscle Strength.
Conditions
Interventions
PRO5x Group: 10 young trained men received a dietary prescription and protein supplements to reach a total amount of protein between 1.6 and 2.4 g.kg-1.d-1, distributed in 5 daily meals. Concomitantly
Dietary supplement
E02.642.249.268
G07.203.300.456
Sponsors
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
Male
Age
18 Years to 35 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: at least 1 year of previous experience in resistance training; absence of chronic condition precluding participation; absence of any metabolic diseases.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: prior use of anabolic steroids; and current use of ergogenic supplements.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Found outcome 2: Dietary intake during the intervention was measured based on food records completed by the participants on 3 non-consecutive days (2 days of the week and 1 day of the weekend), in weeks 1, 4 and 8. There was no difference between groups for carbohydrate intake (PRO3x = 351 ± 46 gd-1; PRO5x = 339 ± 54 g.d-1; p = 0.61), lipids (PRO3x = 90 ± 17 g.d-1; PRO5x = 91 ± 17 g.d-1; p = 0.94), protein (PRO3x = 176 ± 21 g.d-1; PRO5x = 174 ± 14 g.d-1; p = 0.63); relative protein (PRO3x = 2.4 ± 0.39 g.kg-1.d-1; PRO5x = 2.23 ± 0.23 g.kg-1.d-1; p = 0.41) and energy ( PRO3x = 2901 ± 320 Kcal.d-1; PRO5x = 2802 ± 323 Kcal.d-1; p = 0.53) during the intervention. Protein intake relative to body weight per meal: At breakfast, the intake was higher for PRO3x (PRO3x = 0.62 ± 0.93 g.kg-1, PRO5x = 0.36 ± 0.09 g.kg-1; p less than 0.01); in the morning snack, the intake was higher for PRO5x (PRO3x = 0.02 ± 0.01 g.kg-1, PRO5x = 0.29 ± 0.05 g.kg-1; p less than 0.01); at lunch, the intake was the same between the groups (PRO3x = 0.89 ± 0.23 g.kg-1, PRO5x = 0.80 ± 0.15 g.kg-1; p = 0.46); in the afternoon snack, the intake was higher for PRO5x (PRO3x = 0.04 ± 0.03 g.kg-1, PRO5x = 0.30 ± 0.05 g.kg-1; p less than 0.01); at dinner, the intake was higher for PRO3x (PRO3x = 0.82 ± 0.11 g.kg-1, PRO5x = 0.48 ± 0.08 g.kg-1; p less than 0.01); in the evening snack, the intake was the same between the groups (PRO3x = 0.00 ± 0.02 g.kg-1; PRO5x = 0.01 ± 0.01 g.kg-1; p = 1.00). For PRO3x, data from 10 participants were analyzed; for PRO5x, data from 8 participants were analyzed. ;Expected outcome 3: The cross-sectional area of the vastus lateralis muscle was measured from ultrasound images taken from the midpoint of the right thigh. It was not expected that there would be a significant difference between the groups, before or after the intervention. ;Found outcome 3 The cross-sectional area of the vastus lateralis muscle was measured from ultrasound images taken from the midpoint of the right th | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1: Age, participants were asked about their age before the intervention started. It was not expected that there would be a significant difference between groups. ;Found outcome 1: Age, participants were asked about their age before the intervention started. The groups showed no significant difference in terms of age (PRO3x = 25 ± 5 years; PRO5x = 23 ± 4 years, p = 0.27). For PRO3x, data from 10 participants were analyzed; for PRO5x, data from 8 participants were analyzed. ;Expected outcome 2: Height; was measured with a stadiometer before the intervention. It was not expected that there would be a significant difference between groups. ;Found outcome 2: Height; was measured with a stadiometer before the intervention. The groups showed no significant difference in height (PRO3x = 1.73 ± 0.06 m; PRO5x = 1.78 ± 0.04 m, p = 0.07). For PRO3x, data from 10 participants were analyzed; for PRO5x, data from 8 participants were analyzed. ;Expected outcome 3: Weight: the volunteers' body weight was measured with a digital scale. It was not expected that there would be a significant difference between the groups, before or after the intervention. ;Found outcome 3: Weight: the volunteers' body weight was measured with a digital scale. There was no difference between groups, before (PRO3x = 74.3 ± 9.18 kg; PRO5x = 78.43 ± 10.27 kg; p greater than 0.05) or after the intervention (PRO3x = 76.77 ± 9, 92 kg, PRO5x = 80.14 ± 10.96; p greater than 0.05). There was only a significant increase, from pre to post, considering the two groups together (p less than 0.01). For PRO3x, data from 10 participants were analyzed; for PRO5x, data from 8 participants were analyzed. ;Expected outcome 4: Fat percentage: the fat percentage was assessed using DXA. It was not expected that there would be a significant difference between the groups, before or after the intervention. ;Found outcome 4: Fat percentage: the fat percentage was assessed using DXA. There was no dif | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactJosé Henrique da Costa Filho
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Outcome results
None listed