Discussion
CONTRACTION, STS
The objective of this research was to compare the effects of five and 10 repetitions of STS training programs on muscle function and muscle architecture in sedentary adults. The main findings of the study were that both the five and 10 repetitions of STS programs over an 8-week period resulted in significant increases in the MQI and relative STS mean power. Additionally, adaptations in muscle architecture parameters were observed, including an increase in MT and PA. However, the increase in PA was significant only in the 5STS group. These findings suggest that STS, as a low-cost exercise, can improve the muscle function of sedentary individuals and promote adaptations in muscle architecture. It is important to note that this training program is also characterized by its time efficiency. These findings support the implementation of STS programs as a viable and efficient strategy to improve function and muscle architecture in sedentary adults.There are several methods to evaluate muscle quality (There was a significant increase in PA (5STS) and a slight, non-significant decrease in the FL intervention group. Previous studies found an increase in PA in response to concentric contraction training (Another parameter evaluated in this intervention was the adaptation of the VL in the MT, which increased significantly in both the intervention groups. This situation has been observed in response to different types of interventions. MT has been described as a valuable predictor of muscle strength during knee extension (In recent years, various interventions have been tested to examine their effects on health outcomes from low-energy cost routines. Data suggests that low-volume, high-load training can enhance strength (Exercise routines have been tested that interrupt sedentary time and improve insulin and glucose levels. (A limitation of the present study was the heterogeneity in the age of the population. Additionally, to complement the effectiveness of the intervention, additional measurements, such as dynamometric devices to assess strength and velocity, are needed. Another limitation of the study is the absence of an evaluator during the training sessions, which resulted in participants not receiving real-time feedback while performing the exercises to encourage them to complete each repetition at maximum speed. Furthermore, despite being a controlled trial, it was not blinded, as both participants and evaluators were aware of the study conditions and their assigned groups. This lack of blinding may have introduced biases in the data collection and analysis, as expectations and preconceptions could have influenced the results and their interpretation. Additionally, it is worth noting that the measurements of muscular architecture and subsequent analysis were conducted by the same evaluator. Therefore, caution is necessary when generalizing the findings of this study, and these limitations should be considered when interpreting the results.