No Evidence of Postactivation Performance Enhancement on Endurance Exercises: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Narrative reviews have suggested that postactivation induced by warm-up routines is effective to increase endurance exercise performance in real-world scenarios. However, systematic reviews with meta-analysis rather than narrative ones are required to provide an up-to-date summary of the evidence and provide directions for practical decisions. Therefore, we systematically reviewed peer-reviewed and gray literature to determine the certainty of evidence and the relative effects of postactivation performance enhancement (PAPE) in endurance exercises. METHODS: The effects of PAPE on endurance performance were meta-analyzed as a standardized mean difference (SMD) from control conditions within a random-effects model considering polled data and subgroups (PAPE strategies, endurance test modalities, and V̇O 2max -based endurance level). RESULTS: Eligible studies ( n = 35) showed a high risk of bias due to methodological flaws in randomization and blinding procedures. A meta-analysis including 57 comparisons (432 participants) revealed a significant but very small PAPE effect on endurance performance ( Z = 2.49, SMD = 0.15-very small, 95% confidence interval = 0.03 to 0.28) due to exceptional effect sizes reported by two studies (SMD of 2.85 and 2.14). We also observed that neither PAPE strategies nor endurance test modalities or V̇O 2max -based endurance levels influenced the PAPE effects on endurance performance. Meta-regression showed that PAPE effects were correlated neither with the time interval between conditioning routines and endurance exercise nor with endurance exercise duration. We found a very low certainty of evidence that PAPE potentiates endurance performance. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the analyses of bias and certainty of evidence, we found no support to recommend PAPE strategies to improve endurance exercise performance. Significant but very small PAPE effects on endurance performance were due to two exceptional effect sizes.

The reward for placebos: mechanisms underpinning placebo-induced effects on motor performance.

Different from the most popular thinking, the placebo effect is not a purely psychological phenomenon. A body of knowledge from multidisciplinary fields has shown that the expectation of a potential benefit when receiving a treatment induces a cascade of neurochemical-electrophysiological alterations in brain reward areas, including motor-related ones. Alterations in the dopamine, opioid, and glutamate metabolism are the neural representation converting reward-derived declarative forms into an attractive and wanted behavior, thereby changing the activation in reward subcortical and cortical structures involved in motor planning, motor execution, and emotional-cognitive attributes of decision-making. We propose that the expectation of receiving a treatment that is beneficial to motor performance triggers a cascade of activations in brain reward areas that travels from motor planning and motor command areas, passing through corticospinal pathways until driving the skeletal muscles, therefore facilitating the motor performance. Although alternative explanations cannot be totally ruled out, this mechanistic route is robust in explaining the results of placebo-induced effects on motor performance and could lead to novel insights and applications in the exercise sciences. Factors such as sex differences in reward-related mechanisms and aversion-induced nocebo effects should also be addressed.