Nicolay Stien’s research while affiliated with Western Norway University of Applied Sciences and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (40)


Setup for the 1RM dynamic finger flexor strength test with the starting position (A) and the finishing position (B).
Test set-up for the isometric pull-up test.
The individual pre- and post results for the bouldering performance test.
Pre- and post-test results for 1RM dynamic finger flexor strength. *Significantly different from pre-test.
The individual pre- and post results for the dynamic 1RM test.

+2

Five weeks of dynamic finger flexor strength training on bouldering performance and climbing-specific strength tests. A randomized controlled trial
  • Article
  • Full-text available

October 2024

·

273 Reads

·

Erik Bratland

·

·

Nicolay Stien

The aim of the study was to examine the effects of a 5-week dynamic finger flexor strength training program on bouldering performance and climbing-specific strength tests. Advanced to elite level boulderers (n = 31) were randomized to a dynamic finger strength training group (DFS) or a control group (CON). The DFS training program consisted of 3 weekly sessions (3–5 sets, 4–10 repetitions per session). Both groups continued bouldering training as usual throughout the intervention period. Pre- and post-intervention measures included bouldering performance, maximal dynamic finger strength, isometric finger strength (peak and average force), and rate of force development (RFD). The DFS demonstrated greater improvement in dynamic finger strength (11.5%, 3.9 kg) than the CON (5.3%, 1.7 kg; p = 0.075, ES = 0.90), but there were no differences between the groups in 1RM (p = 0.075, ES = 0.67), bouldering performance (p = 0.39, ES = 0.35), isometric finger strength (p = 0.42–0.56, ES = 0.20–0.22) or RFD (p = 0.30, ES = 0.46). The DFS improved dynamic (p < 0.01, ES = 1.83) and isometric peak and average (p < 0.01, ES = 0.98, and p < 0.01, ES = 0.75, respectively) finger strength, while the CON only increased dynamic finger strength (p < 0.05, ES = 0.58). None of groups improved bouldering performance or RFD (p = 0.07–0.58). In conclusion, 5 weeks of DFS training improving dynamic strength to a greater extent than bouldering alone in addition to improving isometric finger strength among advanced boulderers. Isolated bouldering improved dynamic finger flexor strength, but importantly, increased finger strength (dynamic or isometric) did not improve bouldering performance.

Download

The effects of five weeks of climbing training, on and off the wall, on climbing specific strength, performance, and training experience in female climbers—A randomized controlled trial

July 2024

·

370 Reads

Recent research has elucidated the effects of strength training on climbing performance. Although local muscular endurance training of the upper-limbs and finger flexors is frequently suggested, there is currently insufficient evidence to support its impact on climbing performance and climbing-specific strength. Furthermore, there is no evidence on climbers’ experiences related to training and the likelihood of consistent engagement. In addition, the effects of more climbing-specific strength training on walls with built in lights and adjustable angles have yet to be examined. The low percentage of studies involving female subjects, additionally, demonstrates a significant gap in understanding the specific effects of strength training on women in the context of climbing. The aim of this study was thus to assess the effects of five-week on-, and off-the-wall climbing training on climbing performance, climbing-specific strength, and training experience. Thirty-one female lower-grade to advanced climbers were randomly assigned to either a control group, an off-the-wall training or an on-the-wall training group. Apart from the training regimen, all groups followed their usual climbing and bouldering routine. Subjects trained at least twice a week. Bouldering performance, and maximum strength and muscular endurance of the finger flexors and upper-limbs were assessed before and after the intervention. Furthermore, rate of perceived exertion and discomfort, exercise enjoyment, and exercise pleasure were assessed during the first and last training session, as well as after two and a half weeks of training. Intrinsic training motivation was assessed after the last training session. The results showed trends towards positive effects of off-the-wall training on climbing-specific strength, and on-the-wall training on climbing technique. Furthermore, our finding revealed high exercise enjoyment and intrinsic training motivation for both on- and off-the-wall training. Hence, lower-grade to advanced female climbers should rely on personal training preferences.


Overview of the individual expert ratings received on the 1–5 scale. (a) and (b) illustrate changes for the experimental group on boulder problems A and B, respectively, while the changes for the control group on problems A and B are shown in (c) and (d), respectively. The average change is indicated by white markers and asterisks indicate significant changes from pre- to posttest.
Overview of the individual expert ratings received on the 1–5 scale. (a) and (b) illustrate changes for the experimental group on boulder problems A and B, respectively, while the changes for the control group on problems A and B are shown in (c) and (d), respectively. The average change is indicated by white markers and asterisks indicate significant changes from pre- to posttest.
Overview of the individual expert ratings received on the 1–5 scale. (a) and (b) illustrate changes for the experimental group on boulder problems A and B, respectively, while the changes for the control group on problems A and B are shown in (c) and (d), respectively. The average change is indicated by white markers and asterisks indicate significant changes from pre- to posttest.
Overview of the individual expert ratings received on the 1–5 scale. (a) and (b) illustrate changes for the experimental group on boulder problems A and B, respectively, while the changes for the control group on problems A and B are shown in (c) and (d), respectively. The average change is indicated by white markers and asterisks indicate significant changes from pre- to posttest.
Development of Specific Motor Skills through System Wall Bouldering Training: A Pilot Study

July 2024

·

136 Reads

·

1 Citation

Nicolay Stien

·

·

·

[...]

·

This study evaluated the effects of a five-week period of practicing specific climbing movements using a system wall on motor skills and bouldering performance compared to self-regulated, conventional bouldering. Thirteen advanced female boulderers (age: 24.5 ± 3.6 years, height: 166.9 ± 3.4 cm, and body mass: 63.4 ± 8.0 kg) were divided into an experimental group (n = 7) and a control group (n = 6). Both groups continued their normal training routines during the intervention, but the experimental group dedicated 30 minutes of their climbing time twice per week to practicing specific motor skills on a system climbing wall. Before and after the intervention, the participants attempted two boulder problems on the same wall. The performance was registered as the number of attempts to complete the boulder problems and as the highest hold reached within four attempts. Video recordings of climbers’ best attempts, capturing the highest hold reached from a perspective directly behind them, were analyzed by three independent experts. The analysis was conducted using a five-point scale across six categories of movement quality. Modest enhancements in certain motor skills and performance were evident in both groups, revealing no significant distinction between them. The results underscore the efficacy of incorporating system walls into the training routines of advanced female boulder climbers, but the absence of between-group differences highlights the significance of individual preferences when choosing between conventional and system wall bouldering.


An overview of the training interventions. *Reps for resistance training and seconds for static stretching
Individual data, from the Resistance Training-, Static Stretching- and the Control group, in the flexibility and strength tests. Each line represents one individual. ISLDL = isometric straight legged deadlift, ROM = range of motion
Comparison of resistance training vs static stretching on flexibility and maximal strength in healthy physically active adults, a randomized controlled trial

June 2024

·

417 Reads

·

2 Citations

BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation

Background The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of resistance training through full range of motion and static stretching (SS) of the hip and lower back extensors on flexibility and strength in healthy, physically active, adults. Methods Eighteen participants (age: 24.2 ± 3.0 years, body mass: 71.3 ± 8.9 kg, height: 172.8 ± 7.5 cm) were randomly assigned to either a Resistance Training (RT) (n = 6), SS (n = 6), or control (CON) group (n = 6). The sit & reach (S&R) flexibility test and maximum isometric straight legged deadlift (ISLDL) at 95% and 50% range of motion (ROM) were tested pre- and post-intervention with significance set at p < 0.05. Both groups conducted four to eight sets per session. Within each set, the RT group performed eight repetitions each lasting four seconds, while the SS group stretched continuously for 32 s. The rest periods between each set were 60–90 s. Consequently training volume and rest times were matched between the groups. Results The RT and SS groups achieved significant, large magnitude improvements in the S&R test compared to the CON group (p < 0.01 g = 2.53 and p = 0.01, g = 2.44), but no differences were observed between the RT and SS groups (p = 1.00). Furthermore, the RT group demonstrated a larger improvement in 50% and 95% ROM ISLDL compared to SS (p < 0.01, g = 2.69–3.36) and CON (p < 0.01, g = 2.44–2.57). Conclusion Resistance training through a full ROM was equally effective as SS for improving S&R flexibility, but improved hip- and lower back extensor strength more than SS and the CON. The authors recommend using large ROM resistance training to improve hip and lower back extensor flexibility and muscle strength. Trial registration ISRCTN88839251, registered 24. April 2024, Retrospectively registered.


An overview of the training intervention.
Estimation plot showing individual changes within‐ (from pre to post) and effect size between the groups in 1‐RM squat (A), CMJ (B), muscle mass (C), and muscle thickness (D).
High‐frequency resistance training improves maximal lower‐limb strength more than low frequency

March 2024

·

1,301 Reads

·

1 Citation

This study compared the effects of a weekly lower body resistance‐training program divided into low frequency (LOW, one long session) versus high frequency (HIGH, four shorter sessions) in resistance‐trained individuals. Twenty‐two adults with more than 6 months resistance training experience were randomized to either the LOW or HIGH intervention group. Both groups completed an 8‐week training program consisting of four multi‐joint exercises targeting the hip and knee extensors. The program progressed from 12‐repetition maximum (RM) to 6‐RM, with 4–5 sets per exercise performed throughout the intervention. The four exercises were conducted either in one session or four sessions (one exercise per session) per week. 1‐RM in the squat, muscle thickness of the vastus lateralis, muscle mass of the lower body (measured using bioelectrical impedance), and jump height were assessed pre‐ and post‐intervention. The HIGH group demonstrated a statistically significant increase in 1‐RM compared to the LOW group (7 kg, p = 0.01), while no statistically significant differences were found between the groups for the other outcomes (p = 0.26–0.63). Both interventions resulted in statistically significant increases in 1‐RM squat (8 and 15 kg), muscle thickness (2.3 and 2.8 mm), and jump height (1.5 and 1.9 cm) from pre‐to post‐test. There were no statistical changes in lower‐body muscle mass for either group (p = 0.16–0.86). In conclusion, a weekly training protocol of four multi‐joint lower‐limb exercises distributed over four sessions resulted in greater increases in maximal strength compared to one session in resistance‐trained adults. Both frequencies were similarly effective in improving muscle hypertrophy and jump height.


The Connection Between Resistance Training, Climbing Performance, and Injury Prevention

January 2024

·

599 Reads

·

9 Citations

Sports Medicine - Open

Background Climbing is an intricate sport composed of various disciplines, holds, styles, distances between holds, and levels of difficulty. In highly skilled climbers the potential for further strength-specific adaptations to increase performance may be marginal in elite climbers. With an eye on the upcoming 2024 Paris Olympics, more climbers are trying to maximize performance and improve training strategies. The relationships between muscular strength and climbing performance, as well as the role of strength in injury prevention, remain to be fully elucidated. This narrative review seeks to discuss the current literature regarding the effect of resistance training in improving maximal strength, muscle hypertrophy, muscular power, and local muscular endurance on climbing performance, and as a strategy to prevent injuries. Main Body Since sport climbing requires exerting forces against gravity to maintain grip and move the body along the route, it is generally accepted that a climber`s absolute and relative muscular strength are important for climbing performance. Performance characteristics of forearm flexor muscles (hang-time on ledge, force output, rate of force development, and oxidative capacity) discriminate between climbing performance level, climbing styles, and between climbers and non-climbers. Strength of the hand and wrist flexors, shoulders and upper limbs has gained much attention in the scientific literature, and it has been suggested that both general and specific strength training should be part of a climber`s training program. Furthermore, the ability to generate sub-maximal force in different work-rest ratios has proved useful, in examining finger flexor endurance capacity while trying to mimic real-world climbing demands. Importantly, fingers and shoulders are the most frequent injury locations in climbing. Due to the high mechanical stress and load on the finger flexors, fingerboard and campus board training should be limited in lower-graded climbers. Coaches should address, acknowledge, and screen for amenorrhea and disordered eating in climbers. Conclusion Structured low-volume high-resistance training, twice per week hanging from small ledges or a fingerboard, is a feasible approach for climbers. The current injury prevention training aims to increase the level of performance through building tolerance to performance-relevant load exposure and promoting this approach in the climbing field.


The experience of laser light feedback in back-squat resistance training

May 2023

·

76 Reads

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living

Introduction The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the existing literature on performance in resistance training (RT) by addressing how a phenomenological perspective on experiences with inter kinaesthetic affectivity can illuminate experience of practicing RT with non-verbal, visual feedback provided through laser lights attached to the barbell. Method The material is created from qualitative interviews and using inter-kinaesthetic affectivity as analytical lenses. Results The findings show how participants interpret the feedback in the moment and explain how they adjust their movement in dialogue with the feedback and enable the “uptake” of feedback in their embodied experience. The findings show how the participants developed an awareness of how they can equalize the balance on their feet. Discussion We discuss what this means for the understanding of the training process in terms of how practitioners can use the uptake of non-verbal, visual feedback to immediately adjust the quality of their performance by responding kinaesthetically and bodily. The discussion contributes to the question of what kind of role a practitioner's own kinaesthetic and bodily experiences have in the development and organization of RT. Perspectives that include the lived and intersubjective body as a knowledge position are promising for illuminating the whole bodied engagement that is necessary to understand how to perform RT.



Accumulated training volume (kg x sec) in set 1, set 1 + 2, and set 1 + 2 + 3 in the three sessions Low, Low + BFR, and High. Data presented as mean and standard deviation. *p < 0.05, #p < 0.01.
Overview of the study design and finger flexor training apparatus.
Comparison of finger flexor resistance training, with and without blood flow restriction, on perceptional and physiological responses in advanced climbers

February 2023

·

196 Reads

·

1 Citation

This study compared perceptional and physiological responses of finger flexor exercise performed with free flow and blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirteen male advanced climbers completed three sessions of finger flexor resistance exercise at (1) 40% of MVC (Low) and (2) 75% of MVC (High) and (3) BFR at 40% of MVC (Low + BFR) in a randomized and counterbalanced order. Rate of perceived exertion for effort (RPE) and discomfort (RPD), session pleasure/displeasure (sPDF), exercise enjoyment (EES), lactate concentration and oxygen saturation were recorded after the last set. Both low-intensity sessions induced higher RPD than High (p = 0.018–0.022, ES = 1.01–1.09) and High was perceived as more enjoyable than Low-BFR (p = 0.031, ES = 1.08). No differences were found for RPE or sPDF (p = 0.132–0.804). Lactate was elevated more after High than the Low-sessions (p < 0.001, ES = 1.88–2.08). Capillary oxygen saturation was lower after Low + BFR compared to the other sessions (p = 0.031, ES = 1.04–1.27). Finally, the exercise volume was greater in Low compared to High (p = 0.022, ES = 1.14) and Low + BFR (p = 0.020, ES = 0.77). In conclusion, among advanced male climbers, performing Low + BFR led to a similar exercise volume but was perceived as more discomforting and less enjoyable compared to High. The Low session yielded similar responses as the Low + BFR but required a much greater exercise volume.


FIG. 1. Flow chart showing the study selection procedure.
Figure 2). The included studies were not heterogeneous (I 2 = 0%, p = 0.47). The SDM for the studies included in the stratified analysis were not heterogeneous (I 2 = 0%, p > 0.72). The funnel plot and the Begg and Mazumdar Rank Correlation Test (p = 0.174) did not indicate publication bias (please see Supplementary Figure 1)
FIG. 3. The effect of finger resistance-training on finger strength.
FIG. 4. The effect of finger resistance-training on rate of force development.
Effects of climbing- and resistance-training on climbing-specific performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

January 2023

·

839 Reads

·

13 Citations

Biology of Sport

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of climbing and climbing-and-resistance-training on climbing performance, and strength and endurance tests. We systematically searched three databases (SPORTDiscus, SCOPUS, and PubMed) for records published until January 2021. The search was limited to randomized-controlled trials using active climbers and measuring climbing performance or performance in climbing-specific tests. Data from the meta-analysis are presented as standardized difference in mean (SDM) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Eleven studies are included in the systematic review and five studies compared training to a control group and could be meta-analyzed. The overall meta-analysis displayed an improvement in climbing-related test performance following climbing-specific resistance training compared to only climbing (SDM = 0.57, 95%CI = 0.24-0.91). Further analyses revealed that finger strength (SDM = 0.41, 95%CI 0.03-0.80), rate of force development (SDM = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.21-1.61), and forearm endurance (SDM = 1.23, 95%CI = 0.69-1.77) were improved by resistance-training of the finger flexors compared to climbing training. The systematic review showed that climbing performance may be improved by specific resistance-training or interval-style bouldering. However, resistance-training of the finger flexors showed no improvements in strength or endurance in climbing-specific tests. The available evidence suggests that resistance-training may be more effective than just climbing-training for improving performance outcomes. Importantly, interventional studies including climbers is limited and more research is needed to confirm these findings.


Citations (33)


... Two systematic reviews and meta-analyses including 12 and 11 original intervention studies have examined the effects of climbing-specific resistance training (Stien et al., 2023;Langer et al., 2023). Together with three more recently published original studies (Devise et al., 2022;Vigouroux and Devise, 2024;Stien et al., 2024). These articles represent the climbing intervention that have been conducted. ...

Reference:

Five weeks of dynamic finger flexor strength training on bouldering performance and climbing-specific strength tests. A randomized controlled trial
Development of Specific Motor Skills through System Wall Bouldering Training: A Pilot Study

... Insufficient upper-extremity strength may impede the ability to ascend, even when lower-extremity strength is robust [4]. Consequently, the successful execution of a climb is contingent upon the combined strength of both arms, commonly referred to as left grip strength (LGS) and right grip strength (RGS) [5][6][7]. ...

The Connection Between Resistance Training, Climbing Performance, and Injury Prevention

Sports Medicine - Open

... However, it is important to note that physiology of these adaptations may differ during exercise at 30% of MVC compared to higher intensity exercise (23,46,47). Therefore, BFR training at a lower intensity (30% of MVC) appears to be a viable substitute for HIT during recovery periods and may offer advantages, particularly for climbers recovering from injuries, although it is more discomforting and less enjoyable compared to HIT (48). ...

Comparison of finger flexor resistance training, with and without blood flow restriction, on perceptional and physiological responses in advanced climbers

... The mean of the maximum value from each attempt in Newtons (N) was used for the statistical analyses. We also assessed RFD200ms, Time95%, and %MVC200ms [33][34][35][36]. ...

Effects of climbing- and resistance-training on climbing-specific performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Biology of Sport

... In our study, we observed significant differences in most of the analyzed variables. Initially, they were consistent with the existing literature [35]. First and foremost, a significant difference was observed between the training duration and weekly frequency, indicating that training sessions tend to be shorter as the frequency of training increases. ...

Effects of one long vs. two short resistance training sessions on training volume and affective responses in resistance-trained women

... Education enhances the body of information on fitness technology and human-computer interaction. Stien et al. [20] examined how boxing jab performance and technique characteristics are affected by external biofeedback in both rookie and Expert boxers. The trunk rotation and peak bag acceleration are positively impacted by the results, indicating that biofeedback may help both beginners and specialists indirectly improve their technique. ...

The effects of technological and traditional feedback on back squat performance in untrained women

BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation

... This approach can lead to the emergence of the "sticking point" phenomenon, which is commonly observed in resistance training (Kompf and Arandjelović, 2016). The presence of a sticking point decreases the speed during the second half of the resistance movement (Haff, 2016), leading to an inconsistent magnitude of mechanical stimulus throughout the range of motion (Andersen et al., 2022). Variable resistance training (VRT) refers to methods that combine iron chains, elastic bands, and free-weights to enhance both maximum and explosive strengths (Heelas et al., 2021). ...

Comparing the effects of variable and traditional resistance training on maximal strength and muscle power in healthy adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

... Structured recovery days, along with cross-training methods, can help maintain optimal muscle health and ensure that strength training does not negatively affect performance or increase susceptibility to injuries. However, we furthermore describe the significance of upper body strength, highlighted by the correlations of BP performance with LT 1 , while the relationships between LT 2 and strength measures during the SQs and BPs indicate that peak strength may be important for maintaining high-performance levels, as noted Vereide V et al. [37] in elite sport climbers. Moreover, the correlation of mean and maximum power output during the DL and LT 2 emphasizes the role of dynamic strength in sustaining physical performance under fatigue. ...

Differences in Upper-Body Peak Force and Rate of Force Development in Male Intermediate, Advanced, and Elite Sport Climbers

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living

... This "traditional" set structure has been widely adopted in training programs [17][18][19][20]. However, this approach requires substantial time to be spent resting between sets and exercises [21][22][23]. With lack of time commonly reported as one of the biggest barriers to exercise [24][25][26], training efficiency is a crucial consideration for the general population and athletes often must balance competing demands within tight schedules [27]. ...

A Comparison of Affective Responses Between Time Efficient and Traditional Resistance Training

... 12 Further, there is scientific evidence that verbal instructions significantly affect mechanical variables of upper-limb exercises. 13 For instance, mean and peak power were significantly larger during BPT at optimal loads for maximal power output (ie, 50 kg) in resistance-trained males, when participants were asked to lower the bar fast (ie, eccentric action) prior to the push movement (ie, concentric action) compared with medium or slow lowering velocities. 13 In another study, Makaruk et al 14 examined the effect of focusing on a target ahead (ie, external focus of attention [EXT]) versus focusing on the arms (ie, internal focus of attention [INT]) on underhand and overhand shot-put performance using a 4-kg metal shot in national-level athletes. ...

Acute Effects of Barbell Bouncing and External Cueing on Power Output in Bench Press Throw in Resistance-Trained Men