The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Leg press

Manufactured by Technogym
Sourced in Italy, Germany

The Leg Press is a piece of lab equipment designed to assess the muscular strength and endurance of the lower body. It allows users to perform controlled leg presses, focusing on the major muscle groups of the legs, including the quadriceps, hamstrings, and glutes. The Leg Press provides a means to measure and evaluate the force production capabilities of these muscle groups.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

10 protocols using leg press

1

Resistance Training Optimization for Muscle Gains

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
RT consisted of five machine-supported exercises to target all major muscle groups (abdominals, lower back, upper back, chest, and legs) using the following exercise devices: Chest press, lat pulldown machine, lower back machine, abdominal crunch, and leg press (TechnoGym, Neu-Isenburg, Germany). Based on the 1RM tests performed every 4 weeks, the weight load was progressively increased over the 12 weeks to achieve the following target ranges: week 1–4: 50–60% 1RM; week 5–8: 60–75% 1RM; week 9–12: 70–80% 1RM. Repetitions were performed with 2 s of concentric (weight lifting phase) and 2 s of eccentric (weight lowering phase) muscle work until failure. The 1-RT group performed one set of each exercise with a resting period of 2 min between exercises. The 3-RT consisted of three sets of each exercise with similar resting periods between sets and exercises as 1-RT. As the number of repetitions decreased with increasing intensity, the mean session time decreased during the training period from ~20 min/session to ~11 min/session in the 1-RT group and from ~60 min/session to ~38 min/session in the 3-RT group, respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Extracting Biomechanical Metrics from Resistance Exercise

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The study investigated whether mechano-biological descriptors, i.e. the temporal distribution of contraction modes, number of repetitions and total time-under-tension (TUT) could be extracted from accelerometer derived real-world dynamic resistance exercise data on different resistance exercise machines. Nine resistance exercise machines were selected at the gym located at ETH Zurich. The selected machines comprised the most often chosen exercises in a whole-body workout and were as follows: Adductor, Abductor, Chest Press, Leg Curl, Leg Extension, Leg Press, Lower Back, Total Abdominal and Vertical Traction (Technogym, Cesana, Italy). Video recordings, which are considered the gold standard, were made for all exercises.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Resistance Training Protocol for Untrained Individuals

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All 1-RT sessions started with a short warm-up of low-intensity ergometer cycling for 5 min. The main part of the session involved five resistance exercises to address the major muscle groups (abdominals, lower back, legs, chest, and upper back) with the following exercise machines: abdominal crunch, lower back machine, leg press, chest press, and latissimus pulldown machine (TechnoGym, Neu-Isenburg, Germany). For each exercise, a single set of exercise was performed until volitional failure. Each repetition was performed with a 2 s concentric and 2 s eccentric phase of muscle work. The weight load for each exercise was determined based on a maximum strength testing (one-repetition maximum, 1RM) that was performed at T-1 and every 4 weeks of the intervention period, as previously described in detail [41 (link)]. As recommended for previously untrained individuals, a moderate weight load of 50–60% of 1RM was initially used for each exercise to accustom patients to RT [63 (link)]. According to RT guidelines and recent recommendations [63 (link),64 (link),65 (link)], the weight load was progressively increased in 4-week cycles using the following pattern: 50–60% 1RM during weeks 1–4; 60–75% 1RM during weeks 5–8; and 70–80% 1RM during weeks 9–12. The average total time effort per session was ~15 min (excluding warm-up).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Hospital Gym Training Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Training sessions at the hospital gym were carried out following the indication of American College of Sports Medicine [28] . Training program included 3 training sessions per week of 90 min duration. Each training session begun with 10 min of a mix of warm up, and was followed by a 45-minute endurance training: 5 min of low-intensity warm up; 35 min of continuous moderate-intensity training (corresponding to 60–80% of VO2 peak registered during CPET); 5 min of low intensity cool down. Endurance training was carried out with the use of cardio machines, such as cycle ergometer and treadmill (Technogym, Rotterdam). Aerobic exercise was followed by 20 min of resistance strength training, conducted at a variable load of 30–50% of the 1-RM, with the use of compressed-air isotonic machines (pectoral machine, lower-back, leg press, leg extension, adductor machine, deltoids press; Technogym, Rotterdam). At the end of the training session, 5 min of stretching activities were performed. Patient safety during training was ensured by strict monitoring peripheral arterial oxygen saturation, blood pressure and telemetric electrocardiogram.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Progressive Resistance Training Protocols

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each RT session started with a 5 min warm-up of low intensity ergometer cycling. Subsequently, five exercises were performed to address all main muscle groups (i.e., chest, upper back, abdominals, lower back, and legs) using the following weight-machines: Chest press, lat pulldown machine, lower back machine, abdominal crunch, and leg press (TechnoGym, Neu-Isenburg, Germany). Based on the Fmax values determined baseline and thereafter every 4 weeks, the weight load was progressively elevated over the 12 weeks as follows: 50–60% Fmax during week 1–4; 60–75% Fmax during week 5–8; and 70–80% Fmax during week 9–12. All exercises were performed according to the following pattern: 2 s of concentric (weightlifting phase) and 2 s of eccentric (weight lowering phase) muscle work until fatigue. The 1-RT group performed a single set of each exercise. Total time per exercise session was ~15 min (including the 2 min resting phases between exercises). The 3-RT group performed three sets of each exercise with 2 min rest in between, adding up to a total session time of ~50 min.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Maximal Strength Assessment Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Maximal muscle strength was determined by one‐repetition maximum (1RM) strength tests on leg press and leg extension machine (Technogym, Cesena, Italy). Subjects were familiarized with the movement and warmed up prior to testing by performing six repetitions (at ~40% of estimated 1RM) through a full range of motion with a 1‐min rest. After each successful lift the weight was increased until a failed attempt occurred with 3‐min recovery between each attempt. The 1 RM was attained within five attempts. For each preliminary test, subjects were fasted for at least 4 h and were instructed to avoid strenuous physical activity 48 h before.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Assessing Neuromuscular Performance: Vertical Jump, Leg Press, and Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The vertical jump height performed through counter movement jump test was assessed by Optojump Next (Microgate, Italy) in UP, DOWN, and CON [28 (link)]. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) at the leg press (Technogym, Italy) was estimated using the methodology developed by Brzycki [29 (link)] after performing several (eight to ten) repetitions to fatigue in UP, DOWN, and CON. This test estimates the maximal weight an individual can lift for only one repetition [29 (link)]. Subjects were trained in the correct technique before assessment. Additionally, in UP and DOWN, the maximal voluntary contraction force of the lower limbs evaluated through a 5 s isometric Mid-Thigh Pull Test [30 (link)] was measured using a strain-gauge transducer (Deltatech, Italy) and PowerLab (ADInstruments, USA) as previously done [31 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Muscle Strengthening Leg Press Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The equipment used for the muscle strengthening exercises was a horizontal Leg Press (Technogym, Italy, figure 1). The press consisted of adjustable weights, a pulley, a fixed and a vertical footplate, a sliding seat, an adjustable backrest, handles placed on the seat and handles arranged on the folder.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Leg Strength Measurement Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Stature was measured using a wall stadiometer (Seca, Germany) and body mass was measured using a scale to the nearest 0.1kg (Seca, Germany). Leg strength was measured using the leg press (Technogym, Italy) one repetitium maximum (1-RM) test. Participants started performing 5-6 repetitions with a mass of 40kg and the load was progressively increased until the participant was not able to lift one repetition. During the test, speed and power of each lifting was monitored with T-Force dynamic measurement system (Ergotech, Spain) and was used to determine the number of repetitions with each load. In the case of two consecutive dropping repetitions (speed decrement), lifting was stopped to avoid excessive fatigue (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2017) .
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Comprehensive Physical Fitness Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Physical fitness was assessed by evaluating cardio-respiratory fitness, strength, and flexibility. The tests were preceded by two consecutive run-in sessions to become familiar with testing devices and protocols.
Cardio-respiratory fitness was assessed by a maximal treadmill exercise test using a Balke protocol and expressed as maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), as previously detailed [28 (link)]. Isometric muscle strength was measured by means of a strain gauge tensiometer (Digimax, Mechatronic GmbH, Germany) [36 (link)]. Lower limb muscle strength was assessed by maximal voluntary contractions (MVCs) performed at a costumed leg extension machine (Leg press, Easy Line, Technogym), with a 90° angle at the knee and the hip. Upper body muscle strength was assessed by MVCs performed at a shoulder press (Shoulder press/Lat pull, Easy Line, Technogym) along the sagittal plane, with a 90° and 45° angle at the elbow and between the upper arm and the trunk, respectively. For each exercise, three MVC were performed, with 3 min rest interval between contractions. For hip and trunk flexibility assessment, a standard bending test in the standing position was executed [28 (link)]. The test was performed three times and the distance between the finger and the ground was measured at the third attempt.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!