Lower-limb wearable resistance overloads joint angular velocity during early acceleration sprint running.

Lower-limb wearable resistance (WR) facilitates targeted resistance-based training during sports-specific movement tasks. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of two different WR placements (thigh and shank) on joint kinematics during the acceleration phase of sprint running. Eighteen participants completed maximal effort sprints while unloaded and with 2% body mass thigh- or shank-placed WR. The main findings were as follows: 1) the increase to 10 m sprint time was small with thigh WR (effect size [ES] = 0.24), and with shank WR, the increase was also small but significant (ES = 0.33); 2) significant differences in peak joint angles between the unloaded and WR conditions were small (ES = 0.23-0.38), limited to the hip and knee joints, and <2° on average; 3) aside from peak hip flexion angles, no clear trends were observed in individual difference scores; and, 4) thigh and shank WR produced similar reductions in average hip flexion and extension angular velocities. The significant overload to hip flexion and extension velocity with both thigh- and shank-placed WR may be beneficial to target the flexion and extension actions associated with fast sprint running.

Waveform analysis of shank loaded wearable resistance during sprint running acceleration.

Lower-limb wearable resistance (WR) provides a specific and targeted overload to the musculature involved in sprint running, however, it is unknown if greater impact forces occur with the additional limb mass. This study compared the contact times and ground reaction force waveforms between sprint running with no load and 2% body mass (BM) shank-positioned WR over 30 m. Fifteen male university-level sprint specialists completed two maximum effort sprints with each condition in a randomized order. Sprint running with shank WR resulted in trivial changes to contact times at 5 m, 10 m, and 20 m (effect size [ES] = <0.20, p > 0.05) and a small, significant increase to contact time at 30 m by 1.94% (ES = 0.25, p = 0.03). Significant differences in ground reaction force between unloaded and shank loaded sprint running were limited to the anterior-posterior direction and occurred between 20% and 30% of ground contact at 10 m, 20 m, and 30 m. Shank WR did not result in greater magnitudes of horizontal or vertical forces during the initial impact portion of ground contact. Practitioners can prescribe shank WR training with loads ≤2% BM without concern for increased risk of injurious impact forces.

Changes to horizontal force-velocity and impulse measures during sprint running acceleration with thigh and shank wearable resistance.

This study determined the effects of two wearable resistance (WR) placements (i.e. thigh and shank) on horizontal force-velocity and impulse measures during sprint running acceleration. Eleven male athletes performed 50 m sprints either unloaded or with WR of 2% body mass attached to the thigh or shank. In-ground force platforms were used to measure ground reaction forces and determine dependent variables of interest. The main findings were: 1) increases in sprint times and reductions in maximum velocity were trivial to small when using thigh WR (0.00-1.93%) and small to moderate with shank WR (1.56-3.33%); 2) athletes maintained or significantly increased horizontal force-velocity mechanical variables with WR (effect size = 0.32-1.23), except for theoretical maximal velocity with thigh WR, and peak power, theoretical maximal velocity and maximal ratio of force with shank WR; 3) greater increases to braking and vertical impulses were observed with shank WR (2.72-26.3% compared to unloaded) than with thigh WR (2.17-12.1% compared to unloaded) when considering the entire acceleration phase; and, 4) no clear trends were observed in many of the individual responses. These findings highlight the velocity-specific nature of this resistance training method and provide insight into what mechanical components are overloaded by lower-limb WR.

Acute and longitudinal effects of weighted vest training on sprint-running performance: a systematic review.

This systematic review aimed to quantify the acute and longitudinal effects that occur with weighted vests during sprint-running. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science were searched using the Boolean phrases (vest OR trunk) AND (sprint*) AND (resist* OR weight OR load*). From 170 articles retrieved, 11 studies (6 acute, 5 longitudinal) met the inclusion criteria. Vest loads (5-40% body mass) were found to significantly increase acute over-ground times (10-50 m 4.1-16.9%, effect sizes [ES] = 0.93-3.11) through significantly decreased velocity (-2.2% to -17.3%, ES = -0.41 to -3.19), horizontal force (-5.9% to -22.1%, ES = -0.85 to -3.30), maximal power (-4.3% to -35.6%, ES = -0.32 to -3.44), and flight times (-8.3% to -14.6%, ES = -0.88 to -1.03), while increasing contact times (14.7-19.6%, ES = 1.80-3.17). Treadmill sprints were less effected until loads >11% body mass were used. Improvements in velocity (1.2-1.3%, ES = 0.24-0.37) and times (10-50 m 1.2-9.4%, ES = 0.25-3.30) were found in longitudinal studies (5.6-18.9% body mass, 3-7 weeks). Future studies should focus on determining the optimum load and volume to clearly establish the training benefits of this form of resisted sprinting.

Wearable resistance sprint running is superior to training with no load for retaining performance in pre-season training for rugby athletes.

This study determined the effects of a six-week lower-limb wearable resistance training (WRT) intervention on sprint running time, velocity, and horizontal force-velocity mechanical variables. Twenty-two collegiate/semi-professional rugby athletes completed pre- and post-intervention testing of three maximal effort 30 m sprints. A radar device was used to measure sprint running velocity from which horizontal force-velocity mechanical profiling variables were calculated. All athletes completed two dedicated sprint training sessions a week for six-weeks during pre-season. The intervention (wearable resistance, WR) group completed the sessions with 1% body mass load attached to the left and right shanks (i.e. 0.50% body mass load on each limb), whilst the control group completed the same sessions unloaded. For the control group, all variables were found to detrain significantly (p ≤ 0.05) over the training period with large detraining effects (ES > 0.80) for theoretical maximal horizontal force, slope of the force-velocity profile, maximal ratio of force, index of force application, 5 and 10 m times. For the WR group, there were no significant changes to any recorded variables (all p > 0.05) and all effects of training were trivial or small (ES < 0.50). After adjustment for baseline differences, significant between group differences were found for all variables (large effects, ES > 0.80) except theoretical maximal velocity, 30 m time, and maximal velocity. The addition of light wearable resistance to sprint training during a six-week pre-season block enables the maintenance of sprint performance and mechanical output qualities that otherwise would detrain due to inadequate training frequencies.

The effects of lower limb wearable resistance on sprint running performance: A systematic review.

The aim of this review was to examine the literature that has used lower limb wearable resistance (WR) during sprint running. A systematic search was completed to identify acute and longitudinal studies assessing the effects of lower limb WR on sprint running performance from international peer-reviewed journals. The Boolean phrases (limb OR leg OR lower extremity) AND (sprint*) AND (resist* OR weight OR load*) were used to search PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science electronic databases. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis that reported the acute kinematic and kinetic effects (n = 8), acute performance effects (n = 3), and longitudinal effects (n = 1). Results showed that the WR micro-loading (0.6-5% body mass) significantly increased contact time (2.9-8.9%), decreased step frequency (-1.4 to -3.7%), and slowed total sprint times (0.6-7.4%). Unloaded sprinting immediately following sprints with lower limb WR resulted in no significant  change to total sprinting times. One longitudinal training study did not find a significant effect on maximal sprinting speed for non-trained participants. It can be concluded that not all step kinematic variables are affected during sprinting with an added load up to 5% body mass. Therefore, coaches can use lower limb WR to selectively overload certain aspects of sprint running, in particular stride frequency. It also appears that lower limb WR overloads sprint movement velocity and may provide a stimulus to increase horizontal force output, therefore, it may be inferred that lower limb WR has the potential to elicit improved sprinting performance.

Force-velocity profile changes with forearm wearable resistance during standing start sprinting.

Abstract Horizontal force-velocity (F-V) profiling is a strategy to assess athletes' individual performance capabilities during sprinting. This study investigated the acute changes in F-V profiles during sprinting of fourteen collegiate male sprinters with a mean 100-m sprint time of 11.40 ± 0.39 s, from a split-stance starting position. The subjects sprinted 30-m with, and without, wearable resistance (WR) equivalent to 2% body mass, attached to their forearms. Sprinting time at 5, 10, 20, and 30-m was assessed using laser technology. External horizontal F-V relationships were calculated via velocity-time signals. Maximal theoretical velocity (V 0), theoretical relative and absolute horizontal force (F 0), and horizontal power (P max) were determined from the F-V relationship. Paired t-tests were used to determine statistical differences (p ≤ 0.05) in variables across conditions with Cohen's d as effect sizes (ES) calculated to assess practical changes. Sprint times at 10-m and beyond were significantly increased (1.9-3.3%, p 0.01-0.03, ES 0.46-0.60) with WR compared to unloaded sprinting. The only significant change in F-V with the WR condition was found in relative P max system (-6.1%, p 0.01, ES 0.66). A small decrease was reported in V 0 (-1.0%, p 0.11, ES 0.27), with small to medium ES decreases reported in F 0 (-4.8% to -6.1%, p 0.07-0.21, ES 0.25-0.51) and P max (-4.3% to -4.6%, p 0.06-0.08, ES 0.32-0.45). The greater changes to F 0 and P max suggest that forearm WR may be a possible training tool for athletes who wish to focus on force and power adaptation during sprint acceleration from a standing start.

EXAMINATION OF GLUTEUS MAXIMUS ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC EXCITATION ASSOCIATED WITH DYNAMIC HIP EXTENSION DURING BODY WEIGHT EXERCISE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.

BACKGROUND: Hip extension is an important action in daily activities (standing, stepping and walking) and sporting actions (running, sprint-running and jumping). Though several different exercises exist, a comprehensive understanding of which exercises best target the gluteus maximus (Gmax) and the magnitude of muscular excitation associated with each exercise is yet to be established. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the electromyographic (EMG) excitation of the Gmax during body weight exercises that utilize hip extension. METHODS: A systematic approach was used to search Pubmed, Sports Discuss, Web of Science and Science Direct using the Boolean phrases (gluteal OR gluteus maximus) AND (activity OR excitation OR activation) AND (electromyography OR EMG) AND (hip extension). Articles that examined injury-free participants of any age, gender or excitation level were included. Articles were excluded when not available in English, where studies did not normalize EMG excitation to maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), where a load or resistance was added to the exercise, or where no hip extension occurred. Exercises were grouped into vertical and horizontal (anteroposterior or posteroanterior) force vectors. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies of high methodological quality were retained for analysis. Twenty-five exercises were performed in the vertical vector (average: 33.4% MVIC, highest: single leg wall squat 86% MVIC), fourteen exercises were performed in the horizontal (anteroposterior) force vector (average: 32.8% MVIC, highest: single leg bridge 54.2% MVIC, while thirty-eight exercises were included in the horizontal (posteroanterior) vector (average: 30.4% MVIC, highest: plank with bent leg hip extension 106.2% MVIC).Limitations: The differences in subject's backgrounds, exercise technique and the methodological approaches varied between studies, most notably in the different positions used for obtaining MVIC, which could have dramatically impacted normalized levels of gluteal activation. CONCLUSION: The findings from this review provide an indication of Gmax muscle excitation generated by a variety of hip extension body weight exercises, which may assist practitioners in making exercise selection decisions for programming.

The modified Thomas test is not a valid measure of hip extension unless pelvic tilt is controlled.

The modified Thomas test was developed to assess the presence of hip flexion contracture and to measure hip extensibility. Despite its widespread use, to the authors' knowledge, its criterion reference validity has not yet been investigated. The purpose of this study was to assess the criterion reference validity of the modified Thomas test for measuring peak hip extension angle and hip extension deficits, as defined by the hip not being able to extend to 0º, or neutral. Twenty-nine healthy college students (age = 22.00 ± 3.80 years; height = 1.71 ± 0.09 m; body mass = 70.00 ± 15.60 kg) were recruited for this study. Bland-Altman plots revealed poor validity for the modified Thomas test's ability to measure hip extension, which could not be explained by differences in hip flexion ability alone. The modified Thomas test displayed a sensitivity of 31.82% (95% CI [13.86-54.87]) and a specificity of 57.14% (95% CI [18.41-90.10]) for testing hip extension deficits. It appears, however, that by controlling pelvic tilt, much of this variance can be accounted for (r = 0.98). When pelvic tilt is not controlled, the modified Thomas test displays poor criterion reference validity and, as per previous studies, poor reliability. However, when pelvic tilt is controlled, the modified Thomas test appears to be a valid test for evaluating peak hip extension angle.

Differences in unilateral chest press muscle activation and kinematics on a stable versus unstable surface while holding one versus two dumbbells.

Training the bench press exercise on a traditional flat bench does not induce a level of instability as seen in sport movements and activities of daily living. Twenty participants were recruited to test two forms of instability: using one dumbbell rather than two and lifting on the COR bench compared to a flat bench. Electromyography (EMG) amplitudes of the pectoralis major, middle trapezius, external oblique, and internal oblique were recorded and compared. Differences in range of motion (ROM) were evaluated by measuring an angular representation of the shoulder complex. Four separate conditions of unilateral bench press were tested while lifting on a: flat bench with one dumbbell, flat bench with two dumbbells, COR Bench with one dumbbell, and COR Bench with two dumbbells. The results imply that there are no differences in EMG amplitude or ROM between the COR bench and traditional bench. However, greater ROM was found to be utilized in the single dumbbell condition, both in the COR bench and the flat bench.

Acute effects of anterior thigh foam rolling on hip angle, knee angle, and rectus femoris length in the modified Thomas test.

Background. Foam rolling has been shown to acutely increase range of motion (ROM) during knee flexion and hip flexion with the experimenter applying an external force, yet no study to date has measured hip extensibility as a result of foam rolling with controlled knee flexion and hip extension moments. The purpose of this study was to investigate the acute effects of foam rolling on hip extension, knee flexion, and rectus femoris length during the modified Thomas test. Methods. Twenty-three healthy participants (male = 7; female = 16; age = 22 ± 3.3 years; height = 170 ± 9.18 cm; mass = 67.7 ± 14.9 kg) performed two, one-minute bouts of foam rolling applied to the anterior thigh. Hip extension and knee flexion were measured via motion capture before and after the foam rolling intervention, from which rectus femoris length was calculated. Results. Although the increase in hip extension (change = +1.86° (+0.11, +3.61); z(22) = 2.08; p = 0.0372; Pearson's r = 0.43 (0.02, 0.72)) was not due to chance alone, it cannot be said that the observed changes in knee flexion (change = -1.39° (-5.53, +2.75); t(22) = -0.70; p = 0.4933; Cohen's d = - 0.15 (-0.58, 0.29)) or rectus femoris length (change = -0.005 (-0.013, +0.003); t(22) = -1.30; p = 0.2070; Cohen's d = - 0.27 (-0.70, 0.16)) were not due to chance alone. Conclusions. Although a small change in hip extension was observed, no changes in knee flexion or rectus femoris length were observed. From these data, it appears unlikely that foam rolling applied to the anterior thigh will improve passive hip extension and knee flexion ROM, especially if performed in combination with a dynamic stretching protocol.