Kinetic analysis of push-up exercises: a systematic review with practical recommendations

Dhahbi, Wissem; Chaabène, Hélmi; Chaouachi, Anis; Padulo, Johnny; Behm, David G.; Cochrane, Jodie; Burnett, Angus; Chamari, Karim

doi:10.1080/14763141.2018.1512149

Cited by 30 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to our study results, the overall, anterior, posterolateral and posteromedial stability indices of right and left leg, as well as the VJT and IAT scores, showed significant differences in the female athletes with DKV after 8-week plyometric training. One of the possible reasons for the improvement in their balance after plyometric training is the increase in exercise pressure by this training which is created by facilitating and synchronizing the large and fast-twitch motor units [23], stimulation of muscle spindles [24], reduction of Golgi tendon organs' inhibitory effect, and the increase in the coordination of muscles involved in co-contraction activities [25,26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Selective Plyometric Training on the Lower Extremity Functional Performance Indexes of Female Athletes With Dynamic Knee Valgus

Saki

Madhosh

Sedaghati

2019

PTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considering the high prevalence of dynamic valgus and its impact on sports performance among the female athletes, the present study aimed to examine the effect of a course of selective plyometric training on the lower extremity functional performance indexes of female athletes with dynamic knee valgus. Methods: This research was a quasi-experimental study with a pretest-post-test design. The study population comprised the athletic girls with dynamic valgus referring to Bu-Ali Sina gymnasium of the University of Hamadan in 2018. Of them, 26 eligible girls who met the inclusion criteria were selected purposefully and then randomly assigned into experimental (Mean±SD age=20.25±2.34 y, Mean±SD BMI=21.27±2.75 kg/m 2) and control (Mean±SD age=21.16±2.79 y, Mean±SD BMI=21.60±2.68 kg/m 2) groups. The experimental group performed specific plyometric training for 8 weeks, 3 times a week. Assessing the dependent variable was done using dynamic balance, Sargent and Illinois Agility tests in the pretest and post-test. The comparisons between experimental and control groups in the pretest and post-test were made by analysis of covariance and the dependent t-tests, respectively in SPSS V. 20. The significance level was set at 0.05 or lower. Results: Considering the pretest as the covariate parameter, a significant improvement was found for total dynamic balance (P=0.005), anterior leg (P=0.001), medial-posterior leg (P=0.001), lateral-posterior side of right leg (P=0.028), vertical jump (P=0.001) and Illinois jumping test score (P=0.001) in the experimental group. Conclusion: An improvement was seen in the dynamic balance and the movement performance of the participants with dynamic valgus after doing plyometric exercises that result in subsequent improvement in their exercise performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Selective Plyometric Training on the Lower Extremity Functional Performance Indexes of Female Athletes With Dynamic Knee Valgus

Saki

Madhosh

Sedaghati

2019

PTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These exercises are called chin-ups and they are effective for building bigger arms. Unfortunately, chin-ups are spoiled if participants try to swing their bodies, neglect to stretch their arms fully (i.e., absence of full arm extension), or lift their chins (i.e., neck extension; Dhahbi et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a field test for anaerobic capacity, the 300-m shuttle run test was used, consisting of a 20-m, 15-time, maximal-speed, and continuous shuttle run (Moore and Murphy, 2003). 300-m shuttle run test times were measured with a photocell gate (Brower Timing System, Salt Lake City, UT, United States; accuracy of 0.01 s; Dhahbi et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Main aim of this study was examining validity and reliability of using a new specific Parkour repeated sprint ability test (SPRSA) for assessing repeated sprint ability while facing obstacles and establishing between-day reliability and sensitivity of SPRSA related to its physiological and performance responses. Thirteen high-level traceurs (three females) performed in random order and twice eight tests for assessing a total of 23 variables: SPRSA (a typical maximal-speed shuttle run interspersed with four Parkour competition-common fundamentals) and seven established fitness tests, core stability, hand-grip, vertical-jump, long-jump, pull-up, 300-m shuttle run (as a field test for anaerobic capacity), and Leger test. Except for muscular elasticity index of vertical jump test (intra-class Correlation Coefficient model 3,1 [ICC3,1] = 0.54 [fair]), fitness tests’ ICC3,1s resulted excellent (ICC3,1: 0.93–1.00). SPRSA total time and time of its fastest sprint (SPRSA peak time) were significantly correlated with the majority of core stability (r: −0.79 to 0.59; P < 0.01–0.05), jumping (r: −0.78 to 0.67; P < 0.01–0.05), pull-up tests (r: −0.86; P < 0.01), 300-m shuttle run test total time (r: 0.77–0.82; P < 0.01), and Leger test-estimated VO2 max (r: −0.78; P < 0.01). Principal component analysis (PCA) of the 23 variables led to extraction of four significant components (each due to different variables’ combinations), which explained 90.2% of 23 variables’ total variance. SPRSA (i.e., total and peak time) showed high reliability (ICC3,1: 0.991–0.998 and standard-error-of-measurement %: 0.07–0.32). Finally, SPRSA showed high sensitivity (smallest-worthwhile-change %: 0.29–0.68). Considering its excellent logical and strong ecological validity, SPRSA may serve as a valid specific field test for Parkour sport. In addition, thanks to its high reliability and sensitivity, this test is suitable for monitoring, evaluating, and programming training processes for Parkour practitioners in repeated sprint ability involving crossing obstacles.

show abstract

“…Push-ups were performed with support at the feet or knees for men and women, respectively. An experienced evaluator controlled the elbow joint extension and flexion range of motion to 0-90 • , respectively (Dhahbi et al, 2018;Zalleg et al, 2018). With the T-run test, individuals ran as fast as possible (9.14 m forward) and touched a cone (A), then sprinted right (cone B -4.57 m) and then left (cone C -4.57 m) (Padulo et al, 2016).…”

Section: Design and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Core Endurance Relationships With Athletic and Functional Performance in Inactive People

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research regarding the relationship between core muscle endurance and performance is limited. The purpose of this study was to analyze the association between core/trunk endurance and athletic performance. Seventy-four healthy participants between 18 and 45 years old participated in this study (Age: 26.0 ± 6.5 years; Mass: 74.6 ± 12.8 kg; Height: 1.74 ± 0.08 m; BMI: 19.0 ± 6.8 kg/m 2). The core endurance was measured using the McGill protocol, consisting of the following tests: trunk flexion, back extension, and side-bridge. Functional performance was evaluated with push-ups, sit to stand, T-run test, countermovement jump (CMJ), Yo-Yo test, maximum dynamic strengthone repetition maximum (1RM) and muscle power on the bench press, pull row, and leg press. The regression results between the McGill protocol (proxy for core/trunk endurance) and the dependent variables were: 1RM pull row: r 2 = 0.109 with p = 0.046; RM bench press: r 2 = 0.149 with p = 0.012; RM leg press: r 2 = 0.144 with p = 0.013 and power pull row: r 2 = 0.151 with p = 0.016; power bench press: r 2 = 0.136 with p = 0.026; power leg press: r 2 = 0.122 with p = 0.013), push-ups: r 2 = 0.157 with p < 0.001, sit to stand: r 2 = 0.198 with p < 0,001), functional movement score: r 2 = 0.209 with p < 0.001). Nevertheless, core endurance scores were not able to predict jump ability (r 2 = 0.014, p = 0.807) or agility (T-test: 0.036 with p = 0.497). In conclusion, core endurance exerted no significant influence the agility and jump performance but influenced the ability to run intermittently, exert maximum power and strength in different actions (push, pull, and lift exercises) related to the better quality of movement (FMS).

show abstract

Kinetic analysis of push-up exercises: a systematic review with practical recommendations

Cited by 30 publications

References 63 publications

The Effect of Selective Plyometric Training on the Lower Extremity Functional Performance Indexes of Female Athletes With Dynamic Knee Valgus

The Effect of Selective Plyometric Training on the Lower Extremity Functional Performance Indexes of Female Athletes With Dynamic Knee Valgus

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses

Core Endurance Relationships With Athletic and Functional Performance in Inactive People

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About