Objectives: Our goal was to systematically review the current literature and interpret the findings regarding the effects of periodized (PER) versus non-periodized (NP) resistance training programs aimed at muscular hypertrophy. News: Controversy exists as to whether a (PER) approach to resistance training is superior to a (NP) approach for maximizing muscular hypertrophy, or vice-versa, or if no differences exist between the approaches. Prospect and projects: Following a search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases, 12 studies comprising a total of 31 treatment groups met predetermined inclusion criteria. Conclusion: Based on the results of our review, we conclude that similar hypertrophic effects may be achieved using either a PER or a NP approach. Importantly, the findings are specific to short-term training interventions, as the average duration of programs across studies amounted to ~15 weeks; and to untrained individuals, as only two studies involved resistance-trained participants. A limitation of the reviewed literature also pertains to the small number of studies (n = 3) using direct measures of hypertrophy (i.e., magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound). Further research is needed to fill in the gaps in the current literature.
© Copyright 2018 Science & Sports. Elsevier. All rights reserved.