» Articles » PMID: 39776820

Implementation and Evaluation of a 10-Week Kettlebell Training Load Distribution on Strength and Aerobic Capacity in Recreationally Trained Women

Overview
Journal J Chiropr Med
Date 2025 Jan 8
PMID 39776820
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: : The purpose of this study was to characterize the dynamic distribution of training loads in a kettlebell program and evaluate its effects on muscle strength and aerobic capacity.

Methods: Fourteen recreationally active women with no kettlebell training experience (age: 25.86 ± 5.35 years; V̇Omax = 35.14 ± 5.58 mL/kg/min; body mass = 62.13 ± 13.40 kg; height = 164.75 ± 5.77 cm; body mass index = 22.68 ± 3.99 kg/m²) completed a 10-week kettlebell training program. The kettlebell training program was divided into three phases: Phase I (2 weeks), phase II (4 weeks), and Phase III (4 weeks). Maximum muscle strength (1RM) and aerobic fitness (V̇Omax) measurements were performed before (Pre) and after (Post) training. The external and internal loads were represented by the session's total volume and perceived exertion method.

Results: An increase in maximum strength ( < .001; % = 23.73; effect size = 0.87) and V̇Omax ( = .004; % = 9.63; effect size = 0.57) was observed when comparing Pre and Post measurements. There was an increase in total volume when phases I and II ( < .001), phases I and III ( < .001), and phases II and III ( < .001) of the training were compared. The internal load values increased significantly between phases I and II ( < .001). However, there was no difference when comparing phases II and III ( = .796).

Conclusion: The total volume increases during the training phases, and the training load was similar in phases II and III. Furthermore, were observed higher V̇Omax and strength (1 RM load) values.

References
1.
Falatic J, Plato P, Holder C, Finch D, Han K, Cisar C . Effects of Kettlebell Training on Aerobic Capacity. J Strength Cond Res. 2015; 29(7):1943-7. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000845. View

2.
Hulsey C, Soto D, Koch A, Mayhew J . Comparison of kettlebell swings and treadmill running at equivalent rating of perceived exertion values. J Strength Cond Res. 2012; 26(5):1203-7. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182510629. View

3.
Thomas J, Larson K, Hollander D, Kraemer R . Comparison of two-hand kettlebell exercise and graded treadmill walking: effectiveness as a stimulus for cardiorespiratory fitness. J Strength Cond Res. 2013; 28(4):998-1006. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000345. View

4.
Bourdon P, Cardinale M, Murray A, Gastin P, Kellmann M, Varley M . Monitoring Athlete Training Loads: Consensus Statement. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017; 12(Suppl 2):S2161-S2170. DOI: 10.1123/IJSPP.2017-0208. View

5.
Borg G . Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982; 14(5):377-81. View