Split vs Full-Body Training: Which is More Effective?
A comprehensive meta-analysis examines strength and muscle growth outcomes
The study titled "Efficacy of Split versus Full-Body Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Growth: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis" examined the comparative effects of split and full-body resistance training routines on muscle strength and hypertrophy (PMID: 38595233). Conducted by Ramos-Campo et al., this systematic review synthesises data from 14 studies involving a total of 392 subjects.
Key Points
Objective and Methodology
The primary aim was to analyse how split routines (training specific muscle groups on different days) compare to full-body routines (training all major muscle groups in each session) regarding strength gains and muscle growth.
The research followed PRISMA guidelines and included controlled interventions, published in English and involved healthy adults aged 18 to 40.
A comprehensive search yielded 3,108 articles, from which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies varied in design, but all assessed strength (via one-repetition maximum tests) and muscle mass outcomes.
Results
Strength Gains: The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between split and full-body routines for bench press and lower limb strength. Mean differences were:
Bench press: MD = 1.19 (p = 0.34)
Lower limb: MD = 2.47 (p = 0.29)
Muscle Growth: Similarly, muscle hypertrophy outcomes (cross-sectional areas of elbow extensors, elbow flexors, vastus lateralis, and lean body mass) were not significantly different between the two training modalities:
Elbow extensors: MD = 0.30 (p = 0.84)
Elbow flexors: MD = 0.17 (p = 0.91)
Vastus lateralis: MD = -0.08 (p = 0.93)
Lean body mass: MD = -0.07 (p = 0.92)
Related
Practical Takeaways
Training Flexibility: The study concludes that both split and full-body routines can effectively achieve similar strength gains and muscle hypertrophy when training volume is equated. This allows individuals to choose a routine based on personal preference rather than efficacy.
Volume Consideration: While both training types yield comparable results, the overall training volume remains a critical factor in achieving desired adaptations.
Broader Implications: The findings challenge common beliefs within bodybuilding communities that favour split routines for hypertrophy, suggesting that adherence to a preferred training style may be just as important as the specific type of routine selected.
In summary, this study provides robust evidence that neither split nor full-body resistance training is superior for strength or muscle growth when volume is controlled, emphasising the importance of personal choice in training regimens.
Reference
Ramos-Campo DJ, Benito-Peinado PJ, Andreu-Caravaca L, Rojo-Tirado MA, Rubio-Arias JÁ. Efficacy of Split Versus Full-Body Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Growth: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. J Strength Cond Res. 2024 Jul 1;38(7):1330-1340. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004774. Epub 2024 Apr 9. PMID: 38595233.