Dataset Information

Can Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) Improve Resistance Training Volume during the Bench Press Exercise?

ABSTRACT: Background: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) on resistance training volume during the bench press exercise (BP). The study included 12 healthy strength-trained males (age 25.2 ± 2.1 years, body mass 92.1 ± 8.7 kg, BP one-repetition maximum (1RM) 28.8 ± 10.5 kg, training experience 6.3 ± 2.1 years). Methods: The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, where each participant performed two different exercise protocols with a conditioning activity (CA) consisting of the BP with three sets of three repetitions at 85% 1RM (PAPE), and a control without the CA (CONT). To assess the differences between PAPE and CONT, the participants performed three sets of the BP to volitional failure at 60% 1RM. The differences in the number of performed repetitions (REP), time under tension (TUT), peak power output (PP), mean of peak power output (PPMEAN), mean power output (MP), peak bar velocity (PV), mean of peak bar velocity (PVMEAN), and mean bar velocity (MV) between the CONT and PAPE conditions were examined using repeated measures ANOVA. Results: The post-hoc analysis for the main condition effect indicated significant increases in TUT (p < 0.01) for the BP following PAPE, compared to the CONT condition. Furthermore, there was a significant increase in TUT (p < 0.01) in the third set for PAPE compared to the CONT condition. No statistically significant main effect was revealed for REP, PP, PV, PPMEAN, PVMEAN, MP, and MV. Conclusion: The main finding of the study was that the PAPE protocol increased training volume based on TUT, without changes in the number of preformed REP.

SUBMITTER: Krzysztofik M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7177703 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) Improve Resistance Training Volume during the Bench Press Exercise?

Krzysztofik Michal M Wilk Michal M Filip Aleksandra A Zmijewski Piotr P Zajac Adam A Tufano James J JJ

International journal of environmental research and public health 20200408 7

<i>Background</i>: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) on resistance training volume during the bench press exercise (BP). The study included 12 healthy strength-trained males (age 25.2 ± 2.1 years, body mass 92.1 ± 8.7 kg, BP one-repetition maximum (1RM) 28.8 ± 10.5 kg, training experience 6.3 ± 2.1 years). <i>Methods</i>: The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, where each participant performed ...[more]

PMID: 32276452

Similar Datasets

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.

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:Background In swimming, the period between the end of the swimming warmup and the beginning of competition is critical to performance, here termed the transition phase. Several options are available during this phase, necessitating a systematic review to understand if optimal strategies exist. Objectives To synthesise and critically evaluate the current literature investigating land-based warmup interventions on subsequent performance in competitive swimmers. Methods A search of three electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCO SPORTDiscus and Web of Science) was conducted to identify original studies until February 2022. Selection criteria dictated that (i) a control condition was used, (ii) participants were ≥ 15 years of age, (iii) a pool-based warmup was done prior to the land-based warmup. A total of 25 articles met the selection criteria. Results Reducing the transition phase duration by at least half led to consistently faster time-trial times of between 1.1–1.5% for all included studies. Passive warmups using clothing interventions resulted in mostly faster time-trial’s of 0.4–0.8% with increases in skin temperature frequent, though little change occurred in core temperature. The methodology of passive respiratory warmups were vastly different with positive time-trial’s effects ranging between 0.9–1.1% for two studies, though one reported no meaningful difference. Active warmups led to consistently faster time-trial’s between 0.7–0.9%, though the unpinning factors are not clear. Warmups which combined passive and active options frequently led to faster time-trial’s between 0.8–3%. Upper and combined limb post-activation performance enhancement led to mostly unfavourable time-trial changes. Lower limb exclusive protocols results were inconsistent, with limited beneficial effects on time-trial or start performance reported following plyometric protocols. However, there does appear merit in heavier loaded lower limb protocols. Conclusion Each of a reduced transition phase length, and passive, active or combination warmup have demonstrated improvements in swimming performance. Conversely, PAPE protocols should be used with caution, especially when including the upper limbs.

Dataset Information

Can Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) Improve Resistance Training Volume during the Bench Press Exercise?

Publications

Can Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) Improve Resistance Training Volume during the Bench Press Exercise?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets