Single versus multiple sets of resistance exercise: a meta-regression.
Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials
Meta-regression of comparative intervention trials
PubMed 19661829 · doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b370be
What was done
Hierarchical, random-effects meta-regression analyzing English-language studies that compared single versus multiple sets per exercise on dynamic musculoskeletal strength while controlling for other variables. The analysis included 14 studies, 30 treatment groups, and 92 nested effect sizes.
What was found
Multiple sets produced significantly larger effect sizes (ES) for dynamic strength than a single set (difference = 0.26 +/- 0.05; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.37; p < 0.0001). In dose-response analysis, 2 to 3 sets were superior to 1 set (difference = 0.25 +/- 0.06; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.37; p = 0.0001), associated with 46% greater strength gains. No significant differences were found between 1 set and 4 to 6 sets (difference = 0.35 +/- 0.25; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.74; p = 0.17) or between 2 to 3 sets and 4 to 6 sets (difference = 0.09 +/- 0.20; 95% CI: -0.31, 0.50; p = 0.64). Set volume effects showed no interactions with training status, program duration, or upper versus lower body focus.
Why it matters
This meta-analysis quantifies the dose-response relationship between set volume and strength, demonstrating that performing 2 to 3 sets provides superior dynamic strength gains compared to a single set for both trained and untrained individuals.
Limits
The total number of individual participants was not reported in the abstract. Comparisons involving 4 to 6 sets had wide confidence intervals reflecting fewer data points, and inclusion was restricted to English-language publications.
Cited by
- supports Scientific literature indicates that after warming up, the first one or two sets performed are the most valuable for a given resistance training exercise.