Factors Modulating Post-Activation Potentiation of Jump, Sprint, Throw, and Upper-Body Ballistic Performances: A Systema
- PDF / 479,296 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 55 Downloads / 180 Views
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Factors Modulating Post-Activation Potentiation of Jump, Sprint, Throw, and Upper-Body Ballistic Performances: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis Laurent B. Seitz1 • G. Gregory Haff2
Ó Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
Abstract Background Although post-activation potentiation (PAP) has been extensively examined following the completion of a conditioning activity (CA), the precise effects on subsequent jump, sprint, throw, and upper-body ballistic performances and the factors modulating these effects have yet to be determined. Moreover, weaker and stronger individuals seem to exhibit different PAP responses; however, how they respond to the different components of a strength–power–potentiation complex remains to be elucidated. Objectives This meta-analysis determined (1) the effect of performing a CA on subsequent jump, sprint, throw, and upper-body ballistic performances; (2) the influence of different types of CA, squat depths during the CA, rest intervals, volumes of CA, and loads during the CA on PAP; and (3) how individuals of different strength levels respond to these various strength–power–potentiation complex components. Methods A computerized search was conducted in ADONIS, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases up to March 2015. The analysis comprised 47 studies and 135 groups of participants for a total of 1954 participants.
& Laurent B. Seitz [email protected] 1
Center of Resources, Expertise and Sports PerformanceFrench Rugby League Academy, 1 Avenue Edouard Belin, 31400 Toulouse, France
2
Centre for Exercise and Sports Sciences Research (CESSR), Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
Results The PAP effect is small for jump (effect size [ES] = 0.29), throw (ES = 0.26), and upper-body ballistic (ES = 0.23) performance activities, and moderate for sprint (ES = 0.51) performance activity. A larger PAP effect is observed among stronger individuals and those with more experience in resistance training. Plyometric (ES = 0.47) CAs induce a slightly larger PAP effect than traditional highintensity (ES = 0.41), traditional moderate-intensity (ES = 0.19), and maximal isometric (ES = –0.09) CAs, and a greater effect after shallower (ES = 0.58) versus deeper (ES = 0.25) squat CAs, longer (ES = 0.44 and 0.49) versus shorter (ES = 0.17) recovery intervals, multiple(ES = 0.69) versus single- (ES = 0.24) set CAs, and repetition maximum (RM) (ES = 0.51) versus sub-maximal (ES = 0.34) loads during the CA. It is noteworthy that a greater PAP effect can be realized earlier after a plyometric CA than with traditional high- and moderate-intensity CAs. Additionally, shorter recovery intervals, single-set CAs, and RM CAs are more effective at inducing PAP in stronger individuals, while weaker individuals respond better to longer recovery intervals, multiple-set CAs, and sub-maximal CAs. Finally, both weaker and stronger individuals express greater PAP after shallower squat CAs. Conclusions Performing a CA elicits small PAP effec
Data Loading...
