@article{refalo_influence_2023,
	title = {Influence of {Resistance} {Training} {Proximity}-to-{Failure} on {Skeletal} {Muscle} {Hypertrophy}: {A} {Systematic} {Review} with {Meta}-analysis},
	volume = {53},
	issn = {0112-1642, 1179-2035},
	shorttitle = {Influence of {Resistance} {Training} {Proximity}-to-{Failure} on {Skeletal} {Muscle} {Hypertrophy}},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y},
	doi = {10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y},
	abstract = {Background and Objective This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the influence of resistance training proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy.
Methods Literature searches in the PubMed, SCOPUS and SPORTDiscus databases identified a total of 15 studies that measured muscle hypertrophy (in healthy adults of any age and resistance training experience) and compared resistance training performed to: (A) momentary muscular failure versus non-failure; (B) set failure (defined as anything other than momentary muscular failure) versus non-failure; or (C) different velocity loss thresholds.
Results There was a trivial advantage for resistance training performed to set failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy in studies applying any definition of set failure [effect size=0.19 (95\% confidence interval 0.00, 0.37), p=0.045], with no moderating effect of volume load (p=0.884) or relative load (p=0.525). Given the variability in set failure definitions applied across studies, sub-group analyses were conducted and found no advantage for either resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy [effect size=0.12 (95\% confidence interval −0.13, 0.37), p=0.343], or for resistance training performed to high ({\textgreater}25\%) versus moderate (20–25\%) velocity loss thresholds [effect size=0.08 (95\% confidence interval −0.16, 0.32), p=0.529].
Conclusion Overall, our main findings suggest that (i) there is no evidence to support that resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure is superior to non-failure resistance training for muscle hypertrophy and (ii) higher velocity loss thresholds, and theoretically closer proximities-to-failure do not always elicit greater muscle hypertrophy. As such, these results provide evidence for a potential non-linear relationship between proximity-to-failure and muscle hypertrophy.},
	language = {en},
	number = {3},
	urldate = {2025-12-16},
	journal = {Sports Medicine},
	author = {Refalo, Martin C. and Helms, Eric R. and Trexler, Eric. T. and Hamilton, D. Lee and Fyfe, Jackson J.},
	month = mar,
	year = {2023},
	pages = {649--665},
}

{"_id":"nRDyxkeDG2dfAxowx","bibbaseid":"refalo-helms-trexler-hamilton-fyfe-influenceofresistancetrainingproximitytofailureonskeletalmusclehypertrophyasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis-2023","author_short":["Refalo, M. C.","Helms, E. R.","Trexler, E. T.","Hamilton, D. L.","Fyfe, J. J."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Influence of Resistance Training Proximity-to-Failure on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis","volume":"53","issn":"0112-1642, 1179-2035","shorttitle":"Influence of Resistance Training Proximity-to-Failure on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy","url":"https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y","doi":"10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y","abstract":"Background and Objective This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the influence of resistance training proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy. Methods Literature searches in the PubMed, SCOPUS and SPORTDiscus databases identified a total of 15 studies that measured muscle hypertrophy (in healthy adults of any age and resistance training experience) and compared resistance training performed to: (A) momentary muscular failure versus non-failure; (B) set failure (defined as anything other than momentary muscular failure) versus non-failure; or (C) different velocity loss thresholds. Results There was a trivial advantage for resistance training performed to set failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy in studies applying any definition of set failure [effect size=0.19 (95% confidence interval 0.00, 0.37), p=0.045], with no moderating effect of volume load (p=0.884) or relative load (p=0.525). Given the variability in set failure definitions applied across studies, sub-group analyses were conducted and found no advantage for either resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy [effect size=0.12 (95% confidence interval −0.13, 0.37), p=0.343], or for resistance training performed to high (\\textgreater25%) versus moderate (20–25%) velocity loss thresholds [effect size=0.08 (95% confidence interval −0.16, 0.32), p=0.529]. Conclusion Overall, our main findings suggest that (i) there is no evidence to support that resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure is superior to non-failure resistance training for muscle hypertrophy and (ii) higher velocity loss thresholds, and theoretically closer proximities-to-failure do not always elicit greater muscle hypertrophy. As such, these results provide evidence for a potential non-linear relationship between proximity-to-failure and muscle hypertrophy.","language":"en","number":"3","urldate":"2025-12-16","journal":"Sports Medicine","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Refalo"],"firstnames":["Martin","C."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Helms"],"firstnames":["Eric","R."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Trexler"],"firstnames":["Eric.","T."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Hamilton"],"firstnames":["D.","Lee"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Fyfe"],"firstnames":["Jackson","J."],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"March","year":"2023","pages":"649–665","bibtex":"@article{refalo_influence_2023,\n\ttitle = {Influence of {Resistance} {Training} {Proximity}-to-{Failure} on {Skeletal} {Muscle} {Hypertrophy}: {A} {Systematic} {Review} with {Meta}-analysis},\n\tvolume = {53},\n\tissn = {0112-1642, 1179-2035},\n\tshorttitle = {Influence of {Resistance} {Training} {Proximity}-to-{Failure} on {Skeletal} {Muscle} {Hypertrophy}},\n\turl = {https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y},\n\tabstract = {Background and Objective This systematic review with meta-analysis investigated the influence of resistance training proximity-to-failure on muscle hypertrophy.\nMethods Literature searches in the PubMed, SCOPUS and SPORTDiscus databases identified a total of 15 studies that measured muscle hypertrophy (in healthy adults of any age and resistance training experience) and compared resistance training performed to: (A) momentary muscular failure versus non-failure; (B) set failure (defined as anything other than momentary muscular failure) versus non-failure; or (C) different velocity loss thresholds.\nResults There was a trivial advantage for resistance training performed to set failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy in studies applying any definition of set failure [effect size=0.19 (95\\% confidence interval 0.00, 0.37), p=0.045], with no moderating effect of volume load (p=0.884) or relative load (p=0.525). Given the variability in set failure definitions applied across studies, sub-group analyses were conducted and found no advantage for either resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure versus non-failure for muscle hypertrophy [effect size=0.12 (95\\% confidence interval −0.13, 0.37), p=0.343], or for resistance training performed to high ({\\textgreater}25\\%) versus moderate (20–25\\%) velocity loss thresholds [effect size=0.08 (95\\% confidence interval −0.16, 0.32), p=0.529].\nConclusion Overall, our main findings suggest that (i) there is no evidence to support that resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure is superior to non-failure resistance training for muscle hypertrophy and (ii) higher velocity loss thresholds, and theoretically closer proximities-to-failure do not always elicit greater muscle hypertrophy. As such, these results provide evidence for a potential non-linear relationship between proximity-to-failure and muscle hypertrophy.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tnumber = {3},\n\turldate = {2025-12-16},\n\tjournal = {Sports Medicine},\n\tauthor = {Refalo, Martin C. and Helms, Eric R. and Trexler, Eric. T. and Hamilton, D. Lee and Fyfe, Jackson J.},\n\tmonth = mar,\n\tyear = {2023},\n\tpages = {649--665},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Refalo, M. C.","Helms, E. R.","Trexler, E. T.","Hamilton, D. L.","Fyfe, J. J."],"key":"refalo_influence_2023","id":"refalo_influence_2023","bibbaseid":"refalo-helms-trexler-hamilton-fyfe-influenceofresistancetrainingproximitytofailureonskeletalmusclehypertrophyasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis-2023","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y"},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero-group/nmyhill/5868189","dataSources":["Pu9hAwb4etNrzg8Xb"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["influence","resistance","training","proximity","failure","skeletal","muscle","hypertrophy","systematic","review","meta","analysis","refalo","helms","trexler","hamilton","fyfe"],"title":"Influence of Resistance Training Proximity-to-Failure on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis","year":2023}