RESUMEN
The aim was to evaluate the concurrent validity and reliability of the Resistance Intensity Scale for Exercise [RISE], which uses verbal descriptors, to quantify the intensity in velocity-based training with elastic bands. Eighteen trained volunteers performed parallel squats at maximum speed at 40%, 55%, 70%, and 85%1RM in four sessions, two for familiarization and two for reliability. Each set was stopped at a 10% intra-set velocity loss. Participants reported the perceived effort (easy-low-moderate-hard-maximal) at the first and last repetition. The concurrent validation was conducted with external load (i.e., mean propulsive velocity, weight, repetitions, and maximum power) and internal load parameters (i.e., heart rate). Participants' relative strength was calculated to assess its influence on the dependent variable. Acceptable concurrent validity and reliability (ICC>0.77, CV<21%) were observed, with the perceived effort being appropriate to differentiate between intensities and not being influenced by the participants' relative strength (p = 0.88). A categorical linear regression showed significant (p < 0.001) associations between the RISE scores and the weight, repetitions, and mean propulsive velocity (r = 0.43-0.63). The findings certify the usefulness of the perceived exertion for quantifying the intensity during velocity-based training with elastic bands. The perceived exertion of the first and last repetition favors a proper dosage of the training load.
RESUMEN
This study aimed to compare the mechanical (lifting velocity and maximum number of repetitions), physiological (muscular activation, lactate, heart rate, and blood pressure), and psychological (rating of perceived exertion) responses to upper-body pushing exercises performed wearing a sports elastomeric garment or a placebo garment. Nineteen physically active young adults randomly completed two training sessions that differed only in the sports garment used (elastomeric technology or placebo). In each session, subjects performed one set of seated shoulder presses and another set of push-ups until muscular failure. The dependent variables were measured immediately after finishing the set of each exercise. Compared to the placebo garment, the elastomeric garment allowed participants to obtain greater muscular activation in the pectoralis major (push-ups: p = 0.04, d = 0.49; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.64), triceps brachialis (push-ups, p < 0.01, d = 0.77; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.65), and anterior deltoid (push-ups: p < 0.01, d = 0.72; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.83) muscles. Similarly, participants performed more repetitions (push-ups: p < 0.01; d = 0.94; seated shoulder press: p = 0.03, d = 0.23), with higher movement velocity (all p ≤ 0.04, all d ≥ 0.47), and lower perceived exertion in the first repetition (push-ups: p < 0.01, d = 0.61; seated shoulder press: p = 0.05; d = 0.76) wearing the elastomeric garment compared to placebo. There were no between-garment differences in most cardiovascular variables (all p ≥ 0.10). Higher diastolic blood pressure was only found after the seated shoulder press wearing the elastomeric garment compared to the placebo (p = 0.04; d = 0.49). Finally, significantly lower blood lactate levels were achieved in the push-ups performed wearing the elastomeric garment (p < 0.01; d = 0.91), but no significant differences were observed in the seated shoulder press (p = 0.08). Overall, the findings of this study suggest that elastomeric technology integrated into a sports garment provides an ergogenic effect on mechanical, physiological, and psychological variables during the execution of pushing upper-limb resistance exercises.
