This study examined the differences in heart rate and estimated energy expenditure between dumbbell and sandbag lunges. Eighteen participants completed 60-second lunge trials with dumbbells and sandbags weighing 25% of their body weight while heart rate and energy expenditure were measured. The average heart rate and estimated energy expenditure were significantly higher during the sandbag lunge trials compared to the dumbbell lunge trials. This suggests that sandbag training elicits a greater physiological and intensity response than dumbbell training for the same exercise.

1. Differences in Heart Rate and Estimated Energy
Expenditure between Dumbbell and Sandbag Lunges
Rudi A. Zander (Student), Kyle T. Ebersole, (Faculty Sponsor), David J. Cornell, Steve B. Gayhart, Peter J. Sanger, Logan A. Thorp, Egli Spaho, & Jamison C. Bryant
Human Performance and Sport Physiology Laboratory
Integrative Health Care & Performance Unit – Department of Kinesiology
Subjects
18 (14 males, 4 females; Age =22.6 ±2.1 yrs) healthy participants
volunteered to participated in this investigation (Height =173 ±9.25 cm;
Weight =76.2 ±8.7 kg).
Procedures
All participants completed two randomly ordered 60-second DB and SB
lunge trials. Participants stepped to a set of cadence of 60 beats per minute
(bpm) for a total of 30 completed lunges in each trial. Before the start of
the first trial the subjects performed a dynamic warm-up. During the trials
each participant lunged at a length that comfortably maintained proper
form with a weight equal to 25% of their respective body weight. The DBs
and SBs were both held with a neutral grip at shoulder height during each
individual trial, as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively.
Physiological Data Acquisition
All HR data was measured using a Zephyr Bioharness monitor and
respective analysis software (Annapolis, MD). Estimated EE (kJ/min) was
calculated using a previously validated regression equation used to
predicted estimated EE based off of the gender, height, weight, and HR of
the participant (1).
Statistical Analyses
Two-tailed, paired t-tests were used to examine the differences in average
HR and estimated EE between the DB and SB trials. An alpha level of
p<0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. All statistical
analyses were performed using SPSS 20 (IBM Inc., Armonk, NY).
According to the results of this study, SB training modalities elicit greater
physiological responses in HR and estimated EE than a DB training modality.
These findings suggest than SB training may elicit a greater relative exercise
intensity for the same number of repetitions completed than DB training.
Sample size of this study could be considered a limitation, as the amount of
participants was relatively low. Future research should examine physiological
responses during other resistance exercises using a SB modality versus a DB
modality (e.g., squat, bent-over row, etc.). Future research should also further
examine more physiological measures of interest (e.g., ventilation, excess post
oxygen consumption, etc.) between these two training methods.
In recent years, the popularity of functional exercise training methods, such
as sandbag (SB) training, has increased. However, little research has been
conducted to find the difference in physiological responses between this new
training method and traditional exercise training modalities, such as
dumbbells (DB). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the
differences in the physiological measures of heart rate (HR) and estimated
energy expenditure (EE) between acute bouts of DB and SB resistance
training. SB training involves a more unstable weight than that of DB
training. Thus, the researcher’s hypothesized that the physiological
measures would be higher for the SB trials versus the DB trials due to the
physical compensation needed for the more unstable weight.
METHODSMETHODS
RESULTSRESULTSINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
DISCUSSIONDISCUSSION
Average HR of the SB trial was significantly (t=-2.999; p=.008) greater the
DB trial (147.9 ±12.8 bpm vs. 139.9 ±18.7 bpm, respectively), as shown in
Figure 3. Estimated EE of the SB trial was significantly (t=-3.099; p=.007)
greater than the DB trial (54.1 ±10.3 kJ/min vs. 49.6 ±13.4 kJ/min,
respectively), as shown in Figure 4.
Keytel, L, Goedecke, J., Noakes, T., Hiiloskorpi, H., Laukkanen, R., Van Der Merwe, L., &
Lambert, E. (2005). Prediction of energy expenditure from heart rate monitoring during
submaximal exercise. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(3), 289-297.
ABSTRACTABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The use of functional exercise training
modalities, such as sandbag (SB) training, has increased in
popularity in recent years. However, the differences in
physiological responses between these new training stimuli and
traditional exercise training modalities, such as dumbbell (DB)
training, largely remain unknown. PURPOSE: Accordingly, the
purpose of this study was to examine the differences in the
physiological measures of heart rate (HR) and estimated energy
expenditure (EE) between acute bouts of DB and SB resistance
training. METHODS: Eighteen (14 males, 4 females; xˉ =22.6
±2.1 yrs) healthy participants (xˉ =173 ±9.25 cm; xˉ =76.2 ±8.7
kg) completed two randomly ordered 60-second DB and SB lunge
trials. Participants stepped to a set of cadence of 60 beats per
minute (bpm) for a total of 30 completed lunges in each trial.
Before the start of the first trial the subjects performed a dynamic
warm-up. During the trials each participant lunged at a length that
comfortably maintained proper form with a weight equal to 25%
of their respective body weight. The DBs and SBs were both held
with a neutral grip at shoulder height during each individual trial.
HR (bpm) was recorded using a Zephyr Bioharness monitor
(Annapolis, MD). Estimated EE (kJ/min) was calculated using a
previously validated regression equation used to predicted
estimated EE based off of the gender, height, weight, and HR of
the participant. Two-tailed, paired t-tests were used to examine the
differences in average HR and estimated EE between the DB and
SB trials. An alpha level of p<0.05 was used to determine
statistical significance. RESULTS: The average HR of the SB
trial was significantly (t=-2.999; p=.008) greater the DB trial
(147.9 ±12.8 bpm vs. 139.9 ±18.7 bpm, respectively). The
estimated EE of the SB trial was significantly (t=-3.099; p=.007)
greater than the DB trial (54.1 ±10.3 kJ/min vs. 49.6 ±13.4 kJ/min,
respectively). CONCLUSION: According to the results of this
study, the use of SBs during a lunging exercise elicits a greater
HR and estimated EE than the use of DBs. These findings suggest
that SB training may elicit a greater relative exercise intensity than
DB training. Future research should examine the differences in
HR and estimated EE between SB and DB training during other
resistance exercises (e.g., squat, deadlift, etc.). In addition, future
research should also examine other physiological measures of
interest (e.g., ventilation, excess post oxygen consumption, etc.)
between these two training modalities.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: We would like to thank Josh Henkin,
CEO, Innovative Fitness Systems, for his support during this
project.
Figure 1 Figure 2
Figure 3 Figure 4
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the findings of this study may begin a new movement towards
an increased use of functional strength training, such as sandbag training, in
the realm of resistance training. Strength coaches, personal trainers, clinicians,
and other professionals may use this information to increase the intensity of the
workouts prescribed to athletes and clients.
REFERENCESREFERENCES