Dataset Information

Muscle Activation in Traditional and Experimental Barbell Bench Press Exercise: A Potential New Tool for Fitness Maintenance.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The bench press exercise (BP) is commonly practiced in both recreational and professional training. The weight is lowered from a position where the elbows are at a 90° angle at the start and <90° at the end of eccentric phase, and then returned to the elbows extended position. In order to focus the exercise more on the triceps brachii (TB) rather than the pectoralis major (PM), the inter-handle distance (IHD) is decreased diminishing the involvement of the PM in favor of the TB. PURPOSE:To improve performance of the exercise by reducing force dissociation and transmitting 100% of the external load to the muscle tissue we propose a prototype of the barbell with a bar on which two sleeves are capable of sliding. The dynamic modifications of the IHD keep the elbow flexion angle constant at 90°. RESULTS:Analysis of the inter-handle distance (IHD) signals of the upper body muscles showed a marked increase in muscle activity using the experimental barbell for the PM (19.5%) and for the biceps brachii (173%). CONCLUSIONS:The experimental barbell increased the muscle activity typical of the bench press exercise, obtaining the same training induction with a lower load and consequently preventing articular stress.

SUBMITTER: Melani A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6835758 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Muscle Activation in Traditional and Experimental Barbell Bench Press Exercise: A Potential New Tool for Fitness Maintenance.

Melani Andrea A Gobbi Giuliana G Galli Daniela D Carubbi Cecilia C Masselli Elena E Neri Luca Maria LM Giovinco Gaspare G Cicchella Antonio A Galuppo Laura L Presta Valentina V Vaccarezza Mauro M Vitale Marco M Mirandola Prisco P

Sports (Basel, Switzerland) 20191017 10

<h4>Background</h4>The bench press exercise (BP) is commonly practiced in both recreational and professional training. The weight is lowered from a position where the elbows are at a 90° angle at the start and <90° at the end of eccentric phase, and then returned to the elbows extended position. In order to focus the exercise more on the triceps brachii (TB) rather than the pectoralis major (PM), the inter-handle distance (IHD) is decreased diminishing the involvement of the PM in favor of the T ...[more]

PMID: 31627293

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe intensity of barbell bench press exercise is generally prescribed as the load to be lifted for a specific number of repetitions; however, other factors (e.g., execution velocity) can affect bench press exercise intensity. Moreover, no study assessed whether load distribution (i.e., the distance between the disc stacks on the two sides of the barbell) affects exercise intensity. The present study aims to assess how different combinations of load, velocity, and barbell load distribution affect the number of repetitions to failure (REPfailure), and rating of perceived exertion (RPEfatigue) and number of repetitions (REPfatigue) at fatigue onset.MethodsTen males (age 23.3±1.8 years) performed bench press exercises to exhaustion using random combinations of three loads (50%, 65%, and 80% of 1 repetition maximum), three execution velocities (50%, 70%, and 90% of maximal concentric velocity), and two load distributions (narrow and wide). Three separate three-way repeated-measures ANOVAs were performed to assess the effect of load, velocity, and load distribution on REPfailure, RPEfatigue, and REPfatigue expressed as a percentage of REPfailure.ResultsREPfailure was affected by load (p<0.001), velocity (p<0.001), and distribution (p = 0.005). The interactions between load and velocity (p<0.001) and load and distribution (p = 0.004) showed a significant effect on REPfailure, whereas the interaction between velocity and distribution was not significant (p = 0.360). Overall, more REPfailure were performed using lower loads, higher velocities, and a wider distribution. RPEfatigue and REPfatigue were affected by load (p<0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively) and velocity (p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively), and not by distribution (p = 0.510 and p = 0.571, respectively) or the two-way interaction effects. Overall, using higher loads yielded higher RPEfatigue but lower REPfatigue, while RPEfatigue and REPfatigue were higher when slower velocities were used.ConclusionThe current investigation shows that not only load but also velocity and barbell load distribution may influence bench press training volume and perceived exertion.

Project description:The aims of this study were to compare power output during a bench press throw (BPT) executed with (BPTbounce) and without (BPT) the barbell bounce technique, and examine the effect of cueing different barbell descent velocities on BPT power output in resistance-trained males. In total, 27 males (age 23.1 ± 2.1 years; body mass 79.4 ± 7.4 kg; height 178.8 ± 5.5 cm; and 4.6 ± 1.9 years of resistance training experience) were recruited and attended one familiarization session and two experimental sessions (EXP 1 and EXP 2). The force–velocity profile during maximal BPT and BPTbounce (randomized order) under different loads (30–60 kg) was established (EXP 1), and the effect of varying external barbell descent velocity cues “slow, medium, and as fast as possible” (i.e., “fast”) on the power output for each technique (BPT and BPTbounce) was examined (EXP 2). Comparing two BPT techniques (EXP 1), BPTbounce demonstrated 7.9–14.1% greater average power (p ≤ 0.001, ES = 0.48–0.90), 6.5–12.1% greater average velocity (p ≤ 0.001, ES = 0.48–0.91), and 11.9–31.3% shorter time to peak power (p ≤ 0.001–0.05, ES = 0.33–0.83) across the loads 30–60 kg than BPT. The cueing condition “fast” (EXP 2) resulted in greater power outcomes for both BPT and BPTbounce than “slow.” No statistically significant differences in any of the power outcomes were observed between “medium” and “slow” cuing conditions for BPT (p = 0.097–1.000), whereas BPTbounce demonstrated increased average power and velocity under the “medium” cuing condition, compared to “slow” (p = 0.006–0.007, ES = 0.25–0.28). No statistically significant differences were observed in barbell throw height comparing BPT and BPTbounce under each cuing condition (p = 0.225–1.000). Overall, results indicate that both bouncing the barbell and emphasizing barbell descent velocity be considered to improve upper body power in athlete and non-athlete resistance-training programs.

Project description:Background: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) during successive sets of the bench press (BP) exercise under blood flow restriction (BFR). Methods: The study included 10 strength-trained males (age = 29.8 ± 4.6 years; body mass = 94.3 ± 3.6 kg; BP 1-repetition maximum (1RM) = 168.5 ± 26.4 kg). The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, where each participant performed two different exercise protocols: under blood flow restriction (BFR) and control test protocol (CONT) without blood flow restriction. During the experimental sessions, the study participants performed 3 sets of 3 repetitions of the BP exercise at 70%1RM with a 5 min rest interval between sets. The differences in peak power output (PP), mean power output (MP), peak bar velocity (PV), and mean bar velocity (MV) between the CONT and BFR conditions were examined using 2-way (condition × set) repeated measures ANOVA. Furthermore, t-test comparisons between conditions were made for the set 2-set 1, set 3-set 1, and set 3-set 2 delta values for all variables. Results: The post hoc results for condition × set interaction in PP showed a significant increase in set 2 compared to set 1 for BFR (p < 0.01) and CONT (p = 0.01) conditions, a significant increase in set 3 compared to set 1 for the CONT (p = 0.01) condition, as well as a significant decrease in set 3 compared to set 1 for BFR condition occurred (p < 0.01). The post hoc results for condition × set interaction in PV showed a significant increase in set 2 compared to set 1 for BFR (p < 0.01) and CONT (p = 0.01) conditions, a significant increase in set 3 compared to set 1 for CONT (p = 0.03) condition, as well as a significant decrease in set 3 compared to set 1 for BFR condition (p < 0.01). The t-test comparisons showed significant differences in PP (p < 0.01) and PV (p = 0.01) for set 3-set 2 delta values between BFR and CONT conditions. Conclusion: The PAPE effect was analyzed through changes in power output and bar velocity that occurred under both the CONT and BFR conditions. However, the effects of PAPE have different kinetics in successive sets for BFR and for CONT conditions.

Dataset Information

Muscle Activation in Traditional and Experimental Barbell Bench Press Exercise: A Potential New Tool for Fitness Maintenance.

Publications

Muscle Activation in Traditional and Experimental Barbell Bench Press Exercise: A Potential New Tool for Fitness Maintenance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets