(22) COMPARISON OF OLYMPIC AND SAFETY BAR BARBELLS ON FORCE, VELOCITY, POWER, AND RATING OF PERCEIVED EXERTION DURING ACUTE HIGH-INTENSITY BACK SQUATS

The back squat is a widely used exercise to develop lower body strength and the most evidence-based barbell used is the traditional Olympic barbell. Many barbell variations, such as the safety squat bar, have grown in use without establishing their efficacy compared to a traditional Olympic barbell during back squat variations. Further, no studies have examined if any differences exist between a traditional Olympic and safety squat bar barbell during a single session of high-intensity resistance training on measures of perceived exertion, force, velocity, and power output.

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that, compared to a traditional Olympic barbell, a safety squat bar barbell will result in no differences in force, velocity, power, and perceived exertion during an acute session of high-intensity back squats in recreationally trained adults.

Methods: Eleven recreationally trained (resistance trains at least 2x/week for over 1 year) men (age: 22.3±2.9 years; mass: 89.7±19.1 kg; 1RM back squat/body weight: 1.74±0.33 kg) participated in 3 sessions separated by at least 48-72 hours. Session 1 involved familiarization with an Olympic barbell (Rogue) and safety squat bar barbell (Rogue) back squats, determining participants back squat 1RM with an Olympic barbell, and establishing anchor points for the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale. Then, in Sessions 2 and 3, participants randomly completed 3 sets of 6 repetitions at 80% 1RM (Olympic barbell 1RM) using either the Olympic barbell or safety squat bar barbell. Interset RPE was assessed using the OMNI-RES RPE 0-10 scale. Peak force (N) and power output (Watts) for every repetition was determined by participants squatting on a force plate (Bertec). Peak velocity (m/s) for every repetition was measured using a linear position transducer (Tendo). Averages across all repetitions were analyzed for every dependent variable using a paired samples t-test (p< 0.05) between both barbells.

Results: Compared to a traditional Olympic barbell, using a safety squat bar barbell resulted in no significant (p >0.05) differences in average repetition peak force, peak velocity, peak power, and average set RPE during an acute multi-set high-intensity back squat session (Table 1). Further, no differences were observed in the percent change from first to last repetition averaged across multiple sets for all variables (Table 1).

Conclusions: In recreationally resistance-trained adults interested in developing lower body strength and power using the back squat exercise the acute use of either a traditional Olympic barbell or safety squat bar barbell similarly develops force, velocity, and power, and exertion feels similar. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Practitioners working with adult athletes or clients to develop lower body strength and power with the back squat exercise can interchangeably use the safety squat bar barbell and traditional Olympic barbell to similarly train force, velocity, and power across multiple sets.

Acknowledgements: None