Postactivation Potentiation Enhances Upper- and Lower-Body Athletic Performance in Collegiate Male and Female Athletes

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of postactivation potentiation (PAP)-inducing activities in 4 separate studies examining vertical (VJP) and horizontal (HJP) jump performance, shot put performance (SPP), and sprint performance (SP), in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II athletes. Study 1: 12 male (mean ± SD; age = 20.2 ± 2.0 years; height = 178.1 ± 6.2 cm; weight = 73.3 ± 6.43 kg) and 8 female (age = 20.1 ± 1.0 years; height = 169.6 ± 5.5 cm; weight = 59.8 ± 7.6 kg) track athletes participated in HJP and VJP testing before and after performing a parallel back squat (PBS) at 85% 1 repetition maximum (RM). Study 2: 10 (6 men and 4 women) shot put throwers (age = 20.6 ± 0.7 years; height = 182.1 ± 9.8 cm; weight = 102.8 ± 23.6 kg) participated in SPP testing for control (C), 3RM bench press, and 3RM PBS protocols. Study 3: 7 football players (age = 20.4 ± 1.6 years; weight = 87.8 ± 8.3 kg; height = 184.3 ± 7.2 cm) participated in SP testing before (PBS1) and after (PBS2) performing a 3RM PBS. Study 4: 11 football players (age = 20.3 ± 1.8 years; height = 180.6 ± 7.5 cm; weight = 86.1 ± 12.8 kg) participated in VJP testing for C and 3RM PBS protocols. Results of study 1: There was a significant (p ≤ 0.05) increase in VJP (PRE = 61.9 ± 12.3 cm; POST = 63.6 ± 11.6 cm) and HJP (PRE = 93.7 ± 11.0 cm; POST = 95.9 ± 11.5 cm). Study 2: SPP after PBS (11.67 ± 1.92 m) was not different vs. C (11.77 ± 1.81), but bench press (11.91 ± 1.81 m) was significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) than both PBS and C. Study 3: SP time was significantly lower for PBS2 (4.6014 ± 0.17995 seconds) vs. PB1 (4.6557 ± 0.19603 seconds). Study 4: There was no difference in VJP for C (68.35 ± 2.16 cm) vs. PBS (68.12 ± 2.51 cm). Our data show that a 3RM PBS resulted in significant improvements in VJP, HJP, SPP, and SP in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II male and female athletes. Strength and conditioning practitioners should potentially alter their warm-up programs to include PAP protocols to enhance performance of power athletes. However, there were nonresponders in each study, and coaches and athletes need to determine whether it is worthwhile to identify nonresponders before implementing PAP protocols.

Efeito da potencialização pós-ativação no Atletismo: uma revisão sistemática

“…Most studies found in the current review suggest the presence of post-activation potentiation in different athletics events 16,34,35,36,37,38,39 . This may be associated with neuromuscular and molecular changes induced by strength and power activities such as: 1) better recruitment of motor units, especially type-IIx motor units, which have a higher contraction velocity and capacity to generate tension; 2) increased availability of Ca ++ for contraction and 3) increased phosphorylation of light myosin chains, facilitating the interaction of contractile filaments 1,3 .…”

“…In a similar protocol, Terzis et al 35 evaluated the effects of three counter-movement jumps over the throwing distance of experienced athletes and also found improvement in performance one minute after conditioning activity (Pre = 15.45 ± 2.36 m, Post = 15.85 ± 2.41 m, p = 0.0003). Evetovich et al 36 also found an increase in weight throw distance (without conditioning activity = 11.77 ± 1.81, with conditioning activity = 11.91 ± 1.81 m, p ≤ 0.05) in 10 university athletes of both sexes after 3RMs in leg extension five minutes after conditioning activity.…”

“…Linder et al 39 investigated the effect of a series of 4RMs on squatting on the 10-meter running speed in 12 young females and the results indicated improvement of 0.19 seconds (1.2%) in the running time nine minutes after the squatting protocol (Pre = 17.14 ± 1.55, Post = 16.95 ± 1.55). Evetovich et al 36 found an increase in vertical jump height (Pre = 61.9 ± 12.3 cm; Post = 63.6 ± 11.6 cm) and horizontal jump distance (Pre = 93.7 ± 11.0 cm; Post = 95.9 ± 11.5 cm) eight minutes after three squat series at 85% 1RM squats in Athletic university athletes of both sexes. On the other hand, Lim and Kong 40 evaluated the effects of three conditioning protocols: 1) dynamic squatting, 2) maximal isometric knee extension, 3) maximal isometric squat contraction, and 4) control over 30m run performance in 12 speed running athletes.…”

Limited Post-activation Potentiation Effects Provided by the Walking Lunge on Sprint Acceleration: A Preliminary Analysis

“…The sample included six males (age = 23.83 ± 1.17 years; height = 1.77 ± 0.06 m; body mass = 79.30 ± 10.36 kg) and three females (age = 23.00 ± 2.65 years; height = 1.61 ± 0.06 m; body mass = 56.40 ± 5.44 kg). Previous PAP research has combined males and females within their analysis [6,14,17,30,31], and therefore this approach was considered appropriate for this study. Subjects were required to: be currently strength training (≥three hours per week); have a strength training history (≥two times per week) extending over the previous year; be familiar with the WL; and not have any medical conditions compromising participation in the study.…”

“…The WL was performed in the same manner as the strength test. Subjects initially completed 5 repetitions with approximately 70% for 1RM to prepare for the 85% load [16,30], which was followed by 2 min recovery. The 5RM was then performed before the subjects progressed into the sprint tests.…”