Resistance ExerciseNCT07914361
Myo-Reps Versus Traditional Sets for Muscle Strength, Fat-Free Mass, and Time Efficiency
A study testing Myo-Reps resistance training and Traditional three-set resistance training in people with Resistance Exercise and Muscle Strength Development, run by Norwegian University of Science and Technology at 1 site in Norway.
Trial summary
This study compared two ways of doing strength training in healthy adults. The first, called Myo-Reps, is a time-saving method: one hard first set of 8-15 repetitions, followed by three short "mini-sets" of 3-5 repetitions with only 10-20 seconds of rest in between. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Resistance Exercise, Muscle Strength Development
- What is being tested?
- Myo-Reps resistance training and Traditional three-set resistance training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 34 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNorway
- Study dates
- 26 Aug 2025to 3 Dec 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 18-65 years
- Generally good health
- No medical contraindications for heavy resistance training
Who cannot join
- highly advanced trainees
- pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Myo-Reps Versus Traditional Sets for Muscle Strength, Fat-Free Mass, and Time Efficiency: a Randomized Controlled Trial
This study compared two ways of doing strength training in healthy adults. The first, called Myo-Reps, is a time-saving method: one hard first set of 8-15 repetitions, followed by three short "mini-sets" of 3-5 repetitions with only 10-20 seconds of rest in between. The second is traditional training: three sets of 8-15 repetitions with 1-3 minutes of rest between sets.
Thirty-four adults were randomly assigned, by chance, to one of the two groups. For nine weeks everyone trained twice a week, under supervision, doing full-body workouts on 10 gym machines. The researchers measured how much stronger people became on each exercise, how much their fat-free mass (muscle and other lean tissue) changed, how hard the sessions felt, how much weight and how many repetitions were lifted, and how long the sessions took.
The aim was to find out whether the shorter Myo-Reps workouts can build strength and fat-free mass as well as traditional training.
Read the detailed description
Rationale: Lack of time is a common barrier to resistance training. The study tested two competing predictions. If total volume load (load × repetitions) is the main driver of adaptation, traditional three-set training should give greater improvements. If repetitions performed close to failure matter more, Myo-Reps could give similar or greater improvements despite less volume and shorter sessions.
Design: Parallel-group randomized trial in healthy adults, 1:1 allocation, stratified by gender and age, using a central web-based randomization system run by an independent trial unit; allocation was concealed until enrolment. All sessions were directly supervised, and load progression rules were identical in both groups. Week 1: familiarization and baseline body composition. Week 2: baseline strength testing. Weeks 3-11: training. Week 12: repeat testing.
Analysis: No sample-size calculation was performed (convenience sample). Strength comparisons are exploratory and analysed separately for each exercise.
Registration note: This record was registered retrospectively, after data collection was completed. Outcomes are described as defined in the manuscript submitted for publication.
- Conditions
- Resistance Exercise, Muscle Strength Development
- Being tested
- Myo-Reps resistance training, Traditional three-set resistance training
- Keywords
- Myo-Reps, resistance training, strength training, rest-pause training, training volume, time efficiency, muscle strength, fat-free mass
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Myo-Reps resistance trainingOther
Supervised full-body machine-based resistance training, twice weekly for nine weeks. Each exercise: one activation set of 8-15 repetitions close to failure, then three mini-sets of 3-5 repetitions with the same load and 10-20 seconds of rest between sets.
Traditional three-set resistance trainingOther
Supervised full-body machine-based resistance training, twice weekly for nine weeks, using the same 10 exercises. Each exercise: three sets of 8-15 repetitions with 1-3 minutes of rest between sets.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Myo-Rep | Experimental | Nine weeks (weeks 3-11) of two supervised full-body sessions per week on 10 resistance-training machines. For each exercise: one activation set of 8-15 repetitions close to failure, followed by three mini-sets of 3-5 repetitions with the same load, separated by 10-20 seconds of rest. Load progression criteria were identical to the traditional training group. Receives: Other: Myo-Reps resistance training |
| Traditional three-set training | Active comparator | Nine weeks (weeks 3-11) of two supervised full-body sessions per week on the same 10 resistance-training machines. For each exercise: three sets of 8-15 repetitions separated by 1-3 minutes of rest. Load progression criteria were identical to the Myo-Reps group. Receives: Other: Traditional three-set resistance training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in exercise-specific muscular strength (estimated one-repetition maximum, e1RM) across 10 machine exercises
e1RM was derived from 3-10 repetition-maximum tests (Epley equation) for each of the 10 trained machine exercises. Each exercise was analysed separately, and the between-group difference in change from baseline to post-intervention is the outcome.
Measured: Baseline (week 2) to post-intervention (week 12)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Change in fat-free mass
Measured by bioelectrical impedance (InBody 770).
Measured: Baseline (week 1) to post-intervention (week 12)
Session duration
Time taken to complete a training session, averaged per participant.
Measured: Training weeks 3-11
Weekly volume load
Load × repetitions, summed across exercises and averaged per week.
Measured: Training weeks 3-11
Repetitions close to failure
Estimated number of repetitions performed close to muscular failure during training.
Measured: raining weeks 3-11
Session rating of perceived exertion (session RPE)
Participant-rated exertion for each training session.
Measured: Training weeks 3-11
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Nov 2026
- Study start26 Aug 2025
- Primary completion3 Dec 2025
- Study completion3 Dec 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Resistance ExerciseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Two-arm parallel-group randomized trial (1:1) comparing nine weeks of twice-weekly, supervised full-body machine resistance training using either Myo-Reps or traditional three-set training. Randomization was stratified by gender and age.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 34 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Marius S Fimland, Phd, Principal investigator, NTNU - Norwegian University of Science and Technology
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07914361
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SIKT ID: 187305
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 26 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 3 Nov 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data underlying the published results will be made available to qualified researchers on reasonable request to the corresponding author, after publication of the main article. Requests should include a brief research proposal.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Nov 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Myo-Reps Versus Traditional Sets for Muscle Strength, Fat-Free Mass, and Time Efficiency: a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07914361
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SIKT ID: 187305
- Conditions
- Resistance Exercise, Muscle Strength Development
- Keywords
- Myo-Reps, resistance training, strength training, rest-pause training, training volume, time efficiency, muscle strength, fat-free mass
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 34 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 26 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 3 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 3 Dec 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Nov 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study compared two ways of doing strength training in healthy adults. The first, called Myo-Reps, is a time-saving method: one hard first set of 8-15 repetitions, followed by three short "mini-sets" of 3-5 repetitions with only 10-20 seconds of rest in between. The second is traditional training: three sets of 8-15 repetitions with 1-3 minutes of rest between sets.
Thirty-four adults were randomly assigned, by chance, to one of the two groups. For nine weeks everyone trained twice a week, under supervision, doing full-body workouts on 10 gym machines. The researchers measured how much stronger people became on each exercise, how much their fat-free mass (muscle and other lean tissue) changed, how hard the sessions felt, how much weight and how many repetitions were lifted, and how long the sessions took.
The aim was to find out whether the shorter Myo-Reps workouts can build strength and fat-free mass as well as traditional training.
Detailed description
Rationale: Lack of time is a common barrier to resistance training. The study tested two competing predictions. If total volume load (load × repetitions) is the main driver of adaptation, traditional three-set training should give greater improvements. If repetitions performed close to failure matter more, Myo-Reps could give similar or greater improvements despite less volume and shorter sessions.
Design: Parallel-group randomized trial in healthy adults, 1:1 allocation, stratified by gender and age, using a central web-based randomization system run by an independent trial unit; allocation was concealed until enrolment. All sessions were directly supervised, and load progression rules were identical in both groups. Week 1: familiarization and baseline body composition. Week 2: baseline strength testing. Weeks 3-11: training. Week 12: repeat testing.
Analysis: No sample-size calculation was performed (convenience sample). Strength comparisons are exploratory and analysed separately for each exercise.
Registration note: This record was registered retrospectively, after data collection was completed. Outcomes are described as defined in the manuscript submitted for publication.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Two-arm parallel-group randomized trial (1:1) comparing nine weeks of twice-weekly, supervised full-body machine resistance training using either Myo-Reps or traditional three-set training. Randomization was stratified by gender and age.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Myo-Rep | Experimental | Other: Myo-Reps resistance trainingNine weeks (weeks 3-11) of two supervised full-body sessions per week on 10 resistance-training machines. For each exercise: one activation set of 8-15 repetitions close to failure, followed by three mini-sets of 3-5 repetitions with the same load, separated by 10-20 seconds of rest. Load progression criteria were identical to the traditional training group. |
| Traditional three-set training | Active comparator | Other: Traditional three-set resistance trainingNine weeks (weeks 3-11) of two supervised full-body sessions per week on the same 10 resistance-training machines. For each exercise: three sets of 8-15 repetitions separated by 1-3 minutes of rest. Load progression criteria were identical to the Myo-Reps group. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- 18-65 years
- Generally good health
- No medical contraindications for heavy resistance training
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- highly advanced trainees
- pregnancy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Myo-Reps resistance trainingSupervised full-body machine-based resistance training, twice weekly for nine weeks. Each exercise: one activation set of 8-15 repetitions close to failure, then three mini-sets of 3-5 repetitions with the same load and 10-20 seconds of rest between sets. | Other | Myo-Rep |
| Traditional three-set resistance trainingSupervised full-body machine-based resistance training, twice weekly for nine weeks, using the same 10 exercises. Each exercise: three sets of 8-15 repetitions with 1-3 minutes of rest between sets. | Other | Traditional three-set training |
Primary outcome
Change in exercise-specific muscular strength (estimated one-repetition maximum, e1RM) across 10 machine exercises
Time frame: Baseline (week 2) to post-intervention (week 12)
e1RM was derived from 3-10 repetition-maximum tests (Epley equation) for each of the 10 trained machine exercises. Each exercise was analysed separately, and the between-group difference in change from baseline to post-intervention is the outcome.
5 secondary outcomes
Change in fat-free mass
Time frame: Baseline (week 1) to post-intervention (week 12)
Session duration
Time frame: Training weeks 3-11
Weekly volume load
Time frame: Training weeks 3-11
Repetitions close to failure
Time frame: raining weeks 3-11
Session rating of perceived exertion (session RPE)
Time frame: Training weeks 3-11
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Nov 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data underlying the published results will be made available to qualified researchers on reasonable request to the corresponding author, after publication of the main article. Requests should include a brief research proposal.
Related trials for Resistance Exercise
Active, not recruiting
Effects of Resistance Exercise on Enthesitis in Patients With Spondyloarthritis
Spondyloarthritis (SpA), Axial Spondylarthritis (axSpA)
Not yet recruiting
Testing a Smartphone App to Support a Mediterranean Diet and Strength Exercise
Treatment Adherence and Compliance, Resistance Exercise
Not yet recruiting
Exercise in Alzheimer's Disease: Functional Biomarkers
Alzheimer's Dementia (AD), Alzheimer Disease (AD)
Enrolling by invitationEarly Phase 1
Truway Diagnostic Tools in Primary Care
Chronic Disease, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), Obesity, Overweight
Active, not recruiting
Flexibility, Resistance, Aerobic, Movement Execution Training in Adults With Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia
Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Marius S Fimland, Phd principal investigator
NTNU - Norwegian University of Science and Technology
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Myo-Reps resistance training and Traditional three-set resistance training in people with Resistance Exercise and Muscle Strength Development, run by Norwegian University of Science and Technology at 1 site in Norway.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Nov 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Norway. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in exercise-specific muscular strength (estimated one-repetition maximum, e1RM) across 10 machine exercises (time frame: Baseline (week 2) to post-intervention (week 12)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Nov 2026.