Public health guidance includes recommendations to engage in strength-promoting exercise (SPE), but there is little evidence on its links with mortality. Using data from the Health Survey for England and the Scottish Health Survey from 1994-2008, we examined the associations between SPE (gym-based and own-body-weight strength activities) and all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was used to examine the associations between SPE (any, low-/high-volume, and adherence to the SPE guideline (≥2 sessions/week)) and mortality. The core sample comprised 80,306 adults aged ≥30 years, corresponding to 5,763 any-cause deaths (736,463 person-years). Following exclusions for prevalent disease/events occurring in the first 24 months, participation in any SPE was favorably associated with all-cause (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.69, 0.87) and cancer (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56, 0.86) mortality. Adhering only to the SPE guideline was associated with all-cause (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66, 0.94) and cancer (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.48, 0.92) mortality; adhering only to the aerobic activity guideline (equivalent to 150 minutes/week of moderate-intensity activity) was associated with all-cause (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.90) and cardiovascular disease (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.90) mortality. Adherence to both guidelines was associated with all-cause (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57, 0.87) and cancer (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.98) mortality. Our results support promoting adherence to the strength exercise guidelines over and above the generic physical activity targets.

Design We aimed to evaluate the effect of progressive resistance training on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength in coronary heart disease, when compared to control or aerobic training, and when combined with aerobic training. Secondary aims were to evaluate the safety and efficacy of progressive resistance training on other physiological and clinical outcomes. Methods and results Electronic databases were searched from inception until July 2016. Designs included progressive resistance training vs control, progressive resistance training vs aerobic training, and combined training vs aerobic training. From 268,778 titles, 34 studies were included (1940 participants; 71.9% male; age 60 ± 7 years). Progressive resistance training was more effective than control for lower (standardized mean difference 0.57, 95% confidence interval (0.17-0.96)) and upper (1.43 (0.73-2.13)) body strength. Aerobic fitness improved similarly after progressive resistance training (16.9%) or aerobic training (21.0%); (standardized mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval (-0.35-0.08)). Combined training was more effective than aerobic training for aerobic fitness (0.21 (0.09-0.34), lower (0.62 (0.32-0.92)) and upper (0.51 (0.27-0.74)) body strength. Twenty studies reported adverse event information, with five reporting 64 cardiovascular complications, 63 during aerobic training. Conclusion Isolated progressive resistance training resulted in an increase in lower and upper body strength, and improved aerobic fitness to a similar degree as aerobic training in coronary heart disease cohorts. Importantly, when progressive resistance training was added to aerobic training, effects on both fitness and strength were enhanced compared to aerobic training alone. Reporting of adverse events was poor, and clinical gaps were identified for women, older adults, high intensity progressive resistance training and long-term outcomes, warranting future trials to confirm safety and effectiveness.

Clinical practitioners (eg, orthopaedics, physical therapists) and sports practitioners (eg, strength and conditioners, coaches) can respectively recommend and implement IPPs similar to those examined to help reduce injury rates in adolescent team sports contexts.

Release velocity and accuracy are vital components of throwing performance. However, there is no published research on these parameters for throwing in cricket. In this study, we investigated the throwing performance of 110 cricket players from six different populations: elite senior males, elite under-19 junior males, elite under-17 junior males, elite senior females, elite under-19 junior females, and sub-elite senior males. Based on a specifically designed cricket throwing test, participants were assessed for (1) maximal throwing velocity and (2) throwing accuracy at maximal velocity and at three sub-maximal velocities. Elite senior males exhibited the highest peak and mean maximal throwing velocities (P 50.001). Furthermore, the groups of males had significantly higher peak and mean maximal throwing velocities than the groups of females (P 50.01). A speedÁaccuracy trade-off existed such that all groups demonstrated improved accuracy scores at velocities between 75% and 85% maximal throwing velocity compared with 50% maximal throwing velocity and 100% perceived maximal exertion. The results indicate that sex, training experience (years training), and training volume (training time per week) may contribute to throwing performance in cricket players. Further research should focus on understanding the mechanisms behind the observed differences between these groups. This is the first study to describe the inherent throwing profiles of different cricket playing populations. Potentially, we have identified stimulus material for future training developments.

Throwing speed and accuracy are both critical to sports performance but cannot be optimized simultaneously. This speed-accuracy trade-off (SATO) is evident across a number of throwing groups but remains poorly understood. The goal was to describe the SATO in baseball and cricket players and determine the speed that optimizes accuracy. 20 grade-level baseball and cricket players performed 10 throws at 80% and 100% of maximal throwing speed (MTS) toward a cricket stump. Baseball players then performed a further 10 throws at 70%, 80%, 90%, and 100% of MTS toward a circular target. Baseball players threw faster with greater accuracy than cricket players at both speeds. Both groups demonstrated a significant SATO as vertical error increased with increases in speed; the trade-off was worse for cricketers than baseball players. Accuracy was optimized at 70% of MTS for baseballers. Throwing athletes should decrease speed when accuracy is critical. Cricket players could adopt baseball-training practices to improve throwing performance.