1. You have no clue of what to do.
2. You know what to do, but you need a swift kick in the ass by that hired hand.

Either way, you hope to secure a trainer with a lot of experience, a solid exercise science background, and the ability to motivate you. But what guarantees this trainer is knowledgeable regarding exercise prescriptions?

<strong”>?

Your trainer might be certified, but is this the best way to assess knowledge and experience?

The Certification Process

There are a number of organizations a person can go through to become certified (i.e., NSCA, ACSM, NASM, ACE, AFPA, NFPT, and IFPA, to name a few). But possessing a certification is one thing – possessing usable knowledge is another.

Researchers have wondered about this, as well. Is it possible to be certified yet fail to possess basic knowledge of training? To determine this, a survey was generated at Iowa State University and offered to certified exercise professionals. It assessed the knowledge of established “guidance for prescribing exercise” concerns by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM).

“Knowledge is key, though, as the higher your formal education, the greater your ability to prescribe accurate training programs for your clients.”

1,808 certified exercise professionals were questioned. 67% were women and 33% were men, with an average age of 38. All subjects responded via electronic invitations. In addition, the subjects had an average of 7.5 years of work experience and represented all fifty states of the United States of America.

The survey consisted of eleven questions that addressed basic knowledge of the recommended frequency, duration, and intensity regarding exercise program components of heart rate variables, metabolic measures, and the all-important ratings of perceived exertion (RPE).

The respondents were urged to offer answers based on their memory with no assistance from other materials. The survey was entirely anonymous and confidential.

The Questions (Correct Answers at End of Article)

1. What is the recommended frequency (days/week) of moderate-intensity physical activity?
2. What is the recommended duration (time/day) of moderate-intensity physical activity per day?
3. What is the recommended frequency of vigorous-intensity physical activity?
4. What is recommended duration of vigorous-intensity physical activity per day?
5. What is the definition of one metabolic equivalent unit (MET) as a metric of intensity?
6. What is the definition of the range of moderate intensity in terms of METs?
7. What is the definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of METs?
8. What is the definition of the range of moderate intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate?
9. What is the definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate?
10. What is the definition of range of moderate intensity in terms of the rating of perceived exertion (RPE)? A copy of the 6-20 RPE scale was provided for reference.
11. What is the definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of the RPE?

Current fitness professionals were evaluated to determine their actual levels of fitness knowledge.

Each question had five possible responses. For example:

How often should healthy adults perform vigorous-intensity physical activity?

a. At least 1 day per week

b. At least 5 days per week

c. At least 3 days per week

d. At least 2 days per week

e. At least 4 days per week

Following this main part of the survey, the respondents were then asked to respond to four additional questions.

1. Whether they felt confident they knew the answers or if they guessed. This included if they knew all, most, about half, fewer than half, or had guessed on most of the answers.
2. On a scale from zero to ten (with ten being perfect knowledge), they had to specify how well they thought they knew the current physical activity guidelines.
3. On the same scale, they had to specify how well one should know the current physical activity guidelines to apply them effectively and safely as an exercise professional.
4. Regarding sources of knowledge used by exercise professionals, they were asked to specify the primary source of information they used for their professional position.

“Choosing someone with only a certification or a “been there, done that” resume is probably not your best option.”

The knowledge sources reported in the survey included:

• Past experience (n = 209) – 11.66%
• Scientific journals (n = 629) – 34.89%
• Magazines (n = 29) – 1.6%
• The Internet (n = 142) – 8.0%
• Books (n = 389) – 21.5%
• Conferences and clinics (n = 256) – 14.2%
• Television and other media (n = 3) – 0.2%
• Other professionals (n = 151) – 8.4%

Survey Results

Prior to the survey the participants rated their knowledge of the exercise prescription guidelines and ability to administer them safely. On a scale of one to ten, with ten being exceptional, 70% rated their level of knowledge necessary to practice safely and effectively an average of 8.3. Moving on.

• In total, only 43% of the questions were answered correctly. That’s less than one-half.
• Ten participants (0.6%) had no correct answers and only three (0.2%) had all correct answers.
• The best scores were on the question about the definition of one MET in terms of oxygen uptake. 78.6% of the participants selected the correct answer.
• The second best scores were on the question about the recommended duration of moderate-intensity physical activity per day. 67.4% of the participants responded correctly.

A large number of the survey respondants failed miserably at recalling basic asessment standards.

The Depressing Facts

• The worst scores were on the question about the definition of the terms moderate and vigorous intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate and RPE. More specifically, the worst were on the topic vigorous intensity. Only 13.5% of the participants chose the correct answer.
• The second worst scores documented were on the question about the definition of the moderate intensity in terms of RPE. Only 18.3% of the participants answered correctly.
• The third worst scores were on the question about the definition of vigorous intensity in terms of RPE. 21.7% of the participants selected the correct answer.
• Finally, the fourth worst scores were on the question about the definition of moderate intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate. Here, 24.4% of the participants knew the correct answer.

There were significant differences between levels of education in the study participants. Participants with a doctoral degree (PhD, MD, MPT, n = 140) or a master’s degree (n = 657) rated significantly higher than those possessing bachelor’s degree (n = 864). Their average scores respectively were 47.0%, 44.6%, and 41.5%. Some college (n = 93) and high school-only participants rated lower with scores of 39.6% and 38.7%.

“When choosing a personal trainer or seeking advice, it is best to seek someone with a scholarly background.”

A significant effect was also seen in primary job responsibilities. Average scores were as follows:

• Academics/educators (n = 111) – 48.7%
• Corporate wellness specialists (n = 122) – 45.7%
• Students (n = 27) – 44.4%)
• Clinical exercise physiologists (n = 279) – 44.2%
• Other medical or clinical specialists (n = 110) – 44.1%)
• Health and wellness coaches (n = 141) – 43.8%
• Fitness industry supervisory role (n = 78) – 43.5%
• Group exercise instructors (n = 110) – 42.8%
• Rehabilitation specialists (n = 128) – 42.5%
• Researchers (n = 42) – 42.0%
• Personal trainers (n = 622) – 40.6%
• Others (n = 37) – 35.9%

Gender, age, and years of professional experience were not associated with overall knowledge of the guidelines. Similarly, possessing one, two, or three different certifications had no difference in overall knowledge.

The Responsibility Of Education

We are all not geniuses. Knowledge is key, though, as the higher your formal education, the greater your ability to prescribe accurate training programs for your clients.

When choosing a personal trainer or seeking advice, it is best to seek someone with a scholarly background. Choosing someone with only a certification or a “been there, done that” resume is probably not your best option.

The Correct Answers to the Survey

1. Frequency of moderate-intensity physical activity = 5–7 days per week.
2. Duration of moderate-intensity physical activity per day = At least 30 minutes per day. It can be accumulated throughout the day (i.e., 3 x 10:00 sessions).
3. Frequency of vigorous-intensity physical activity = At least 3 days per week.
4. Duration of vigorous-intensity physical activity per day = At least 20 minutes per day. It can be accumulated throughout the day (i.e., 2 x 10:00 sessions).
5. Definition of one MET as a metric of intensity = 3.5 ml of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute.
6. Definition of the range of moderate intensity in terms of METs = 3.0–5.9.
7. Definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of METs = 6.0–8.7.
8. Definition of the range of moderate intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate = 64–76%.
9. Definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of percentages of maximal heart rate = 77–95%.
10. Definition of range of moderate intensity in terms of the rating of RPE = 12–13.
11. Definition of the range of vigorous intensity in terms of the RPE = 14–17.

Check out these related articles:

• How to Spot the Charlatans In the Personal Training Business
• Buyer Beware – How Not to Hire a Phony Personal Trainer
• What You Need to Know to Choose a Personal Trainer
• What’s New On Breaking Muscle Today

References:

1. Zenko, Zachary and P. Ekkekakis, “Knowledge of Exercise Prescription Guidelines Among Certified Exercise Professionals.” Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 29 (2015): 5, pp. 1422-1432.

Photos courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Bro, Do You Even Read? Assessing Trainer Competence appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

But what if no instruction at all is even better than coaching? In a recent study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, investigators sought to find the answer to that question.

Many people prefer not to work with a trainer because they want to do their own thing and move at their own pace. If you can choose exercises yourself, you’re more likely to work out because you’ll be doing things you like. People may also put more effort into exercises they find enjoyable. So it’s not unreasonable to think results would be better with a self-directed program instead of no instruction at all.

This Calls For a Study

Oddly enough, though, no one has ever actually studied which method is better. So, the researchers in this study took 34 adults who trained an average of once or twice per week and put them into one of two workout groups to find out.

Each workout plan was three times per week and lasted for twelve weeks. At the beginning and end of the program, the participants were tested for their lean body mass and their strength, power, and aerobic ability.

One of the two programs involved going to see a personal trainer for those 36 training sessions. The trainers at the gym where the sessions took place planned the programming. The programs were proprietary (meaning the details were hush-hush), but the researchers did divulge that the plans had three different phases:

• The first phase involved a functional movement screen to determine what movements the participants could safely perform, with a lot of low-weight, high-rep work.
• The second phase involved an increase in intensity and a decrease in volume, focusing on the exercises that were safest.
• The third and final phase included heavy weights like the second phase, but also higher volume, and more complex moves, like explosive exercises.

The group that received no training just worked out those 36 times completely on their own. Not only did they not have a trainer working with them during their sessions, but they also had no specific program to follow.

Results

The group with no trainer lost more total bodyweight, but that was about it, and it’s not so great when you consider the bigger picture. You see, the no-trainer group gained no muscle, whereas the trained group gained almost three pounds of muscle. In fact, since the trained group lost no weight despite gaining all that muscle, they must have also reduced fat more than the trainer group.

But that’s not all. Despite the fact that explosive training didn’t come until the end of the program, the trained group had more explosive power when the twelve weeks were up. They also had greater strength in their upper and lower bodies and a higher VO2 max when it was all said and done.

So in-person training with a well-educated professional seems to be the best option, as long as it’s possible for you. Even a program featuring fairly modest advancement in intensity and volume like the structured program used here can still outperform a solo effort.

References:

1. Thomas Storer, et. al., “Effect of Supervised, Periodized Exercise Training vs. Self-Directed Training on Lean Body Mass and Other Fitness Variables in Health Club Members,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 28(7), 2014

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post Personal Trainers: To Hire One or Not to Hire One? appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

In this packed episode, Managing Editor Becca Borawski Jenkins and Coach Chet Morjaria, speak with Andrew Read. Through more than twenty years in the fitness industry, Andrew has worked with Olympians, national champions, and everyday athletes. He continues to drive himself forward both athletically and in terms of knowledge, training with some of the best in the world including Dan John and the Gym Jones crew.

If you want to learn how to coach better, program better, and perform better, then press play, sit back, and enjoy!

Check Out Fitness Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Breaking Muscle on BlogTalkRadio

Andrew Read has been a personal trainer and a coach for over two decades. Even after a lifetime of competitive martial arts and some time spent in special forces he still maintains a passion for increasing human performance, especially that go-all-day, outrun-a-zombie, live-in-an-apocalyptic-wasteland kind of fitness. His personal and professional experience combine to create a unique and insightful perspective on the fitness industry and those within it.

• 00:13 – Introduction to Andrew Read
• 01:12 – Andrew’s background as a writer
• 02:42 – The state of the personal training industry
• 03:20 – The skills personal trainers need to have longevity in the industry
• 05:11 – The business side of training and the personal sacrifices required
• 09:37 – Feelings on CrossFit and how it fits in to the fitness industry
• 11:55 – Eliminating stupidity in the industry
• 13:29 – Who is not stupid in the fitness industry
• 18:05 – Dan John, Pavel, and other greats – what we can learn from them
• 21:21 – Thirty-second elevator pitch on Andrew’s training philosophy
• 22:50 – Getting caught up in one aspect of fitness
• 24:33 – Balancing training plans and scheduling a training week
• 31:46 – Considerations for masters athletes
• 36:13 – Active recovery and days off
• 40:00 – The importance of lifestyle and mindset
• 46:05 – Short questions related to strength and conditioning
• 50:24 – Andrew’s contact details and upcoming events

Andrew has a background that ranges from special forces through to Ironman. He is a Master RKC and writes for several websites and magazines such as Oxygen, Ultrafit, Blitz, and his own blog at Read Performance Training.

Click Here to Read Articles and Athlete Journals by Andrew Read

The post Eradicating Stupidity with Andrew Read, Ep 3 appeared first on Breaking Muscle.

I used to teach personal training at a community college in Australia. It was exactly what you’d think it was – filled with young, aspiring trainers who had seen Biggest Loser and thought it might be a nice way to fill in some time between going to clubs. I think out of the nearly hundred students I taught over an eighteen-month period only five or six are still left in the industry. During that time I used to go into a local big chain gym for the sole purpose of having some ammunition for my weekly “don’t be this guy” talk.

On one particular occasion I watched while a personal trainer walked away from their client while he had them doing some lunges to return with a BOSU. I’m not big on leaving clients – you just never know when bad things will happen. Like the time a client of mine was running around an empty aerobics room to warm up and tripped and broke her arm. Bad things can happen instantly. Anyway, this PT came back with his BOSU and started doing burpees on it. He would stand on it and then basically sprawl so that his chest hit it and bounce back up landing on it again. I have to say it’s a pretty neat trick.

But then tragedy struck. On one rep the trainer slipped, rolled off it, and lay crumpled on the ground. Whatever he’d done to his leg was bad enough he couldn’t put weight on it. Trooper that he was, he started trying to train his client from the ground while the client kept trying to get him to get help and an X-ray. In the end the client walked away from the session and told him to get help. The scene finished with two other PTs helping our hero up from the floor and I resumed training. Next week when I came back this same guy was now in a big boot for whatever it was he’d broken.

Why on Earth this guy felt the need to show off in front of his client I’ll never understand. It would have been one thing if he’d been demonstrating this exercise (for what intended purpose I have no idea), but he wasn’t even interested in his client doing this. It was just an out and out demonstration of his physical prowess. Or, as it turns out, his lack of it (as well as sense).

I’m not much for doing anything in front of clients. It’s not my training session. One of the things I really like about the RKC is we’re reminded to carry our strength with modesty. My clients don’t really care about what I can do; only what I can get them to do. Besides, if I want to show off my tiny athletic ability I’ll go and actually compete in something. Nothing will plant your feet firmly on the ground like seeing how mediocre you really are.

I also often look at what most trainers are doing and wonder where on earth their plan is. The last gym I was in charge of we had a rule that you had to have a pre-written program for all your clients at the start of the day. We would spot check the trainers and if they didn’t measure up they received extra training on why it was so important that each individual have their own personalized plan – you know personal training.

But then it started to get like NASA. One of the guys who had a decent sports science background started using all kinds of tracking procedures. His first hour-long session with his clients was him explaining to them how to use the spreadsheet process and telling them how it all worked. They’d then be expected to fill in their own homework spots for him before the next session so he could adjust accordingly. While it was certainly very personalized and made sure they were all getting an optimal amount of work in each week, I had a few of them confide in me that it was taking them two hours a week to log all their training.

Training really isn’t that complicated. Perhaps if you’re going to train an athlete to the world stage you may need it. But for the average punter something as simple as, “run 40 minutes as 10 easy, 10 moderate, 10 hard, 10 easy” is going to give them as good a result, and save considerable time, as any rocket science program. Because if you’re running 6min/kms you don’t need a fancy plan.

Likewise you don’t really need as many variations on a theme as you can fit into your day. If you do bench press you don’t also need incline press, decline press, dumbbell flys (does anyone still do those?), pec deck, and cable crossovers. Despite what the Weider Research Institute likes to tell people there’s really no way to blitz your inner pecs. Just picking one movement that you can do well and working the hell out of it will bring far more result than toying around with every similar move.

This is often why people get a little confused when they come and start training with us. It seems like our training style is so, well, basic. Back when I was teaching personal training the powers that be kept trying to tell me that exercises like the squat and the deadlift were “advanced” exercises. Maybe a double body weight squat is an advanced exercise, but a goblet squat with a 16kg bell isn’t. (See: Squat Therapy + No More 1RMs) But then they check back in a few months time and see our clients are vastly different. On our most recent squat day last week I had clients double kettlebell front squat 40kg bells for four and another client hit fives with double 36s.

Keeping it to the basics, and remembering not to do BOSU burpees, will take most people as far as they ever want to go physically. There’s just no need for anything that requires complicated spreadsheets or daily tracking. These days, even with my own training, I don’t keep track of total distance anymore. I just note the session and go and do it. My coach is excellent at keeping my distance work simple and effective, and my own strength training is about as simple as it gets. I figure if I’m getting great results from this simple, no fuss style, then my clients will too. It saves on time wasted both inside and outside the gym, and helps keeps senseless injuries at bay. And if you feel like showing off then go compete in something. That should bring you back to down to earth pretty quickly.

Photos courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post When Training Goes Wrong appeared first on Breaking Muscle.