Refine
Year of publication
- 2022 (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- anthropometry (1)
- athletic performance (1)
- exercise test (1)
- water sports (1)
- youth sports (1)
Institute
Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of moderate intensity, low volume (MILV) vs. low intensity, high volume (LIHV) strength training on sport-specific performance, measures of muscular fitness, and skeletal muscle mass in young kayakers and canoeists.
Methods: Semi-elite young kayakers and canoeists (N = 40, 13 ± 0.8 years, 11 girls) performed either MILV (70–80% 1-RM, 6–12 repetitions per set) or LIHV (30–40% 1-RM, 60–120 repetitions per set) strength training for one season. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare effects of training condition on changes over time in 250 and 2,000 m time trials, handgrip strength, underhand shot throw, average bench pull power over 2 min, and skeletal muscle mass. Both between- and within-subject designs were used for analysis. An alpha of 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance.
Results: Between- and within-subject analyses showed that monthly changes were greater in LIHV vs. MILV for the 2,000 m time trial (between: 9.16 s, SE = 2.70, p < 0.01; within: 2,000 m: 13.90 s, SE = 5.02, p = 0.01) and bench pull average power (between: 0.021 W⋅kg–1, SE = 0.008, p = 0.02; within: 0.010 W⋅kg–1, SE = 0.009, p > 0.05). Training conditions did not affect other outcomes.
Conclusion: Young sprint kayakers and canoeists benefit from LIHV more than MILV strength training in terms of 2,000 m performance and muscular endurance (i.e., 2 min bench pull power).
Can compression garments reduce the deleterious effects of physical exercise on muscle strength?
(2022)
Background
The use of compression garments (CGs) during or after training and competition has gained popularity in the last few decades. However, the data concerning CGs' beneficial effects on muscle strength-related outcomes after physical exercise remain inconclusive.
Objective
The aim was to determine whether wearing CGs during or after physical exercise would facilitate the recovery of muscle strength-related outcomes.
Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted across five databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCOhost). Data from 19 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 350 healthy participants were extracted and meta-analytically computed. Weighted between-study standardized mean differences (SMDs) with respect to their standard errors (SEs) were aggregated and corrected for sample size to compute overall SMDs. The type of physical exercise, the body area and timing of CG application, and the time interval between the end of the exercise and subsequent testing were assessed.
Results
CGs produced no strength-sparing effects (SMD [95% confidence interval]) at the following time points (t) after physical exercise: immediately <= t < 24 h: - 0.02 (- 0.22 to 0.19), p = 0.87; 24 <= t < 48 h: - 0.00 (- 0.22 to 0.21), p = 0.98; 48 <= t < 72 h: - 0.03 (- 0.43 to 0.37), p = 0.87; 72 <= t < 96 h: 0.14 (- 0.21 to 0.49), p = 0.43; 96 h <= t: 0.26 (- 0.33 to 0.85), p = 0.38. The body area where the CG was applied had no strength-sparing effects. CGs revealed weak strength-sparing effects after plyometric exercise.
Conclusion
Meta-analytical evidence suggests that wearing a CG during or after training does not seem to facilitate the recovery of muscle strength following physical exercise. Practitioners, athletes, coaches, and trainers should reconsider the use of CG as a tool to reduce the effects of physical exercise on muscle strength.