Over the last two decades, exercise of the core muscles has gained major interest in professional sports. Research has focused on injury prevention and increasing athletic performance. We analyzed the guidelines for so-called functional strength training for back pain prevention and found that programs were similar to those for back pain rehabilitation; even the arguments were identical. Surprisingly, most exercise specifications have neither been tested for their effectiveness nor compared with the load specifications normally used for strength training. Analysis of the scientific literature on core stability exercises shows that adaptations in the central nervous system (voluntary activation of trunk muscles) have been used to justify exercise guidelines. Adaptations of morphological structures, important for the stability of the trunk and therefore the athlete's health, have not been adequately addressed in experimental studies or in reviews. In this article, we explain why the guidelines created for back pain rehabilitation are insufficient for strength training in professional athletes. We critically analyze common concepts such as 'selective activation' and training on unstable surfaces.
Strength training-induced increases in speed strength seem indisputable. For trainers and athletes, the most efficient exercise selection in the phase of preparation is of interest. Therefore, this study determined how the selection of training exercise influences the development of speed strength and maximal strength during an 8-week training intervention. Seventy-eight students participated in this study (39 in the training group and 39 as controls). Both groups were divided into 2 subgroups. The first training group (squat training group [SQ]) completed an 8-week strength training protocol using the parallel squat. The second training group (leg-press training group [LP]) used the same training protocol using the leg press (45° leg press). The control group was divided in 2 subgroups as controls for the SQ or the LP. Two-factorial analyses of variance were performed using a repeated measures model for all group comparisons and comparisons between pretest and posttest results. The SQ exhibited a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) increase in jump performance in squat jump (SJ, 12.4%) and countermovement jump (CMJ, 12.0%). Whereas, the changes in the LP did not reach statistical significance and amounted to improvements in SJ of 3.5% and CMJ 0.5%. The differences between groups were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). There are also indications that the squat exercise is more effective to increase drop jump performance. Therefore, the squat exercise increased the performance in SJ, CMJ, and reactive strength index more effectively compared with the leg-press in a short-term intervention. Consequently, if the strength training aims at improving jump performance, the squat should be preferred because of the better transfer effects.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of free-weight and machine-based exercises to increase different strength and speed-strength variables. One hundred twenty male participants (age: 23.8 ± 2.5 years; body height: 181.0 ± 6.8 cm; body mass: 80.2 ± 8.9 kg) joined the study. The 2 experimental groups completed an 8 week periodized strength training program that included 2 training sessions per week. The exercises that were used in the strength training programs were the parallel barbell squat and the leg press. Before and after the training period, the 1-repetition-maximum in the barbell squat and the leg press, the squat jump, the countermovement jump and unilateral isometric force (maximal isometric force and the rate of force development) were evaluated. To compare each group pre vs. post-intervention, analysis of variance with repeated measures and Scheffé post-hoc tests were used. The leg press group increased their 1-repetition-maximum significantly (p < 0.001), while in the squat group such variables as 1-repetition-maximum, the squat jump and the countermovement jump increased significantly (p < 0.001). The maximal isometric force showed no statistically significant result for the repeated measures factor, while the rate of force development of the squat group even showed a statistically significant decrease. Differences between the 2 experimental groups were detected for the squat jump and the countermovement jump. In comparison with the leg press, the squat might be a better strength training exercise for the development of jump performance.
Dividing training objectives into consecutive phases to gain morphological adaptations (hypertrophy phase) and neural adaptations (strength and power phases) is called strength-power periodization (SPP). These phases differ in program variables (volume, intensity, and exercise choice or type) and use stepwise intensity progression and concomitant decreasing volume, converging to peak intensity (peaking phase). Undulating periodization strategies rotate these program variables in a bi-weekly, weekly, or daily fashion. The following review addresses the effects of different short-term periodization models on strength and speed-strength both with subjects of different performance levels and with competitive athletes from different sports who use a particular periodization model during off-season, pre-season, and in-season conditioning. In most periodization studies, it is obvious that the strength endurance sessions are characterized by repetition zones (12-15 repetitions) that induce muscle hypertrophy in persons with a low performance level. Strictly speaking, when examining subjects with a low training level, many periodization studies include mainly hypertrophy sessions interspersed with heavy strength/power sessions. Studies have demonstrated equal or statistically significant higher gains in maximal strength for daily undulating periodization compared with SPP in subjects with a low to moderate performance level. The relatively short intervention period and the lack of concomitant sports conditioning call into question the practical value of these findings for competitive athletes. Possibly owing to differences in mesocycle length, conditioning programs, and program variables, competitive athletes either maintained or improved strength and/or speed-strength performance by integrating daily undulating periodization and SPP during off-season, pre-season and in-season conditioning. In high-performance sports, high-repetition strength training (>15) should be avoided because it does not provide an adequate training stimulus for gains in muscle cross-sectional area and strength performance. High-volume circuit strength training performed over 2 years negatively affected the development of the power output and maximal strength of the upper extremities in professional rugby players. Indeed, meta-analyses and results with weightlifters, American Football players, and throwers confirm the necessity of the habitual use of ≥80% 1 RM: (1) to improve maximal strength during the off-season and in-season in American Football, (2) to reach peak performance in maximal strength and vertical jump power during tapering in track-and-field, and (3) to produce hypertrophy and strength improvements in advanced athletes. The integration and extent of hypertrophy strength training in in-season conditioning depend on the duration of the contest period, the frequency of the contests, and the proportion of the conditioning program. Based on the literature, 72 h between hypertrophy strength training and strength-power training should be pr...
ObjectiveThe influence of the jaw position on postural control, body posture, walking and running pattern has been reported in the literature. All these movements have in common that a relatively small, but well controlled muscle activation is required. The induced effects on motor output through changed jaw positions have been small. Therefore, it has been questioned if it could still be observed in maximal muscle activation.MethodTwenty-three healthy, mid age recreational runners (mean age = 34.0 ± 10.3 years) participated in this study. Three different jump tests (squat jump, counter movement jump, and drop jumps from four different heights) and three maximal strength tests (trunk flexion and extension, leg press of the right and left leg) were conducted. Four different dental occlusion conditions and an additional familiarization condition were tested. Subjects performed the tests on different days for which the four occlusion conditions were randomly changed.ResultsNo familiarization effect was found. Occlusion conditions with a relaxation position and with a myocentric condylar position showed significantly higher values for several tests compared to the neutral condition and the maximal occlusion position. Significance was found in the squat jump, countermovement jump, the drop jump from 32cm and 40cm, trunk extension, leg press force and rate of force development. The effect due to the splint conditions is an improvement between 3% and 12% (min and max). No influence of the jaw position on symmetry or balance between extension and flexion muscle was found.ConclusionAn influence of occlusion splints on rate of force development (RFD) and maximal strength tests could be confirmed. A small, but consistent increase in the performance parameters could be measured. The influence of the occlusion condition is most likely small compared to other influences as for example training status, age, gender and circadian rhythm.
BackgroundDecisions on orthopedic interventions on upper body posture and its control have usually resulted from comparisons with the healthy state. Therefore, practitioners as well as scientists in human movement science or orthopedics need access to such kind of data which are patient-centered and well measured. Until now, these data have been missing concerning upper body posture as well as postural control and their control. That is why the aim of the current project is to measure these data with healthy participants across the lifespan.ResultsFor standard value determination tolerance range and confidence intervals will be calculated. In addition, Pearson- or Spearman-Rank correlations will be used as well as two-sample-t-tests or Mann-Whitney-U-tests for specific group differences. All tests will be two-sided with the level of significance of 5 %.DiscussionThis project aims at improving classifications in adaptations of upper body posture and postural control. Measured standard values have not been determined before to this extent. Therefore, interventional effects may become better quantifiable and justiciable.
For the development of speed strength in professional sports, "specific" strength training in the half or the quarter squat have been recommended. Due to the better lever ratios, higher loads have to be used to induce the necessary training stimuli compared to the deep squat. Therefore, intradiscal pressure and compressive forces on vertebral bodies increase. Calculated compressive forces for the L3/L4 vertebral segment were revealed to be 6-10-fold bodyweight when the half or the quarter squat was performed with 0.8-1.6-fold bodyweight. After 10 weeks of training, physical education students have even been able to lift 3.89-fold bodyweight in the one repetition maximum (1-RM) of the quarter squat. The presented dependence of squatting depth, load and their influence on the spinal column have not been discussed before. A search for relevant scientific literature was conducted using PubMed. Concerns about increased risk of injuries in the deep squat have been disproven by plenty of cross-sectional studies with professional athletes. On the contrary, the comparably supramaximal weight loads in the half and the quarter squat should be regarded as increasing injury risks caused by the higher shear and compressive forces in the vertebral column. Therefore, we come to the conclusion that the half and the quarter squat should not further be recommended.
Objectives The primary objective of this study was to examine the effects of one-session physical or mindfulness training on university students’ mood, attention and executive functions in two separate randomized studies. Methods Study 1 (physical activity intervention) was implemented in a seminar with 63 and Study 2 (mindfulness intervention) in another seminar with 28 university students. The physical intervention included stretching exercises, balancing tasks, and medium intensity cardiovascular activities. The mindfulness training included yoga exercises, guided attention, and a body scan. In the control conditions, students watched a 15-min fitness or yoga video, respectively. Several mood and attention scales, as well as executive functions were assessed before and after the intervention or control activity. A randomized within-subject cross-over design was applied in both studies. Results Repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed that participants in both intervention conditions reported mood to be more positive, more awake and calmer after the intervention compared to the control conditions. These effects were medium to large (Study 1: eta2 = .08-.30, Study 2: eta2 = .15-.30). Attention scores improved more relative to the control condition after the physical intervention (medium effect size, eta2 = .11). Executive function scores improved more relative to the control condition after the mindfulness intervention (medium effect size, eta2 = .17). Conclusions These results indicate that a short bout (15-min) of physical or mindfulness activity in a university learning setting positively affected dimensions of mood and cognition known to support academic learning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.