NSAIDs do not prevent exercise-induced performance deficits or alleviate muscle soreness: A placebo-controlled randomized, double-blinded, cross-over study.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently consumed by athletes to manage muscle soreness, expedite recovery, or improve performance. Despite the prevalence of NSAID use, their effects on muscle soreness and performance, particularly when administered prophylactically, remain unclear. This randomized, double-blind, counter-balanced, crossover study examined the effect of consuming a single dose of each of three NSAIDs (celecoxib, 200 mg; ibuprofen, 800 mg; flurbiprofen, 100 mg) or placebo 2 h before on muscle soreness and performance following an acute plyometric training session. Twelve healthy adults, aged 18-42 years, completed a standardized plyometric exercise session consisting of 10 sets of 10 repetitions at 40 % 1-repetition maximum (1RM) on a leg press device. During exercise, total work, rating of perceived exertion, and heart rate were measured. Maximum voluntary contraction force (MVC), vertical jump height, and muscle soreness were measured before exercise and 4-h and 24-h post-exercise. We found no significant differences in total work, heart rate, or rating of perceived exertion between treatments. Additionally, no significant differences in muscle soreness or vertical jump were observed between treatments. Ibuprofen and flurbiprofen did not prevent decrements in MVC, but celecoxib attenuated decreases in MVC 4-h post exercise (p < 0.05). This study suggests that athletes may not benefit from prophylactic ibuprofen or flurbiprofen treatment to prevent discomfort or performance decrements associated with exercise, but celecoxib may mitigate short-term performance decrements.

Body composition changes during 8 weeks of military training are not accurately captured by circumference-based assessments.

In 1981, the US military adopted body fat standards to promote physical readiness and prevent obesity. Separate circumference-based equations were developed for women and men. Both predictive equations were known to underestimate %BF. However, it was not known how well these abdominal circumference-based methods tracked changes in %BF. This study examined the validity of the circumference-based %BF equations for assessing changes in %BF in young adult recruits during Army Basic Combat Training (BCT). Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and circumference-based measures of %BF were obtained in women (n = 481) and men (n = 926) at the start (pre-BCT) and end (post-BCT) of 8 weeks of BCT. Repeated-measure ANOVAs were used to assess differences between DXA and circumference pre-BCT and for the change during BCT. Pre-BCT, circumferences underestimated %BF relative to DXA, with mean errors of -6.0% ± 4.4% for women and -6.0% ± 3.5% for men (both p < 0.01), and no difference between sexes was observed (p = 0.77). DXA detected a -4.0% ± 2.4% and -3.3% ± 2.8% change in %BF for women and men in response to BCT, respectively (both p < 0.01), whereas circumference estimates of %BF indicated a 0.0% ± 3.3% (p = 0.86) change in women and a -2.2% ± 3.3% (p < 0.01) change in men (sex difference by technique p < 0.01). In conclusion, circumference-based measures underestimated %BF at the start of BCT in both sexes as compared to DXA. Circumference measures underestimated changes in %BF during BCT in men and did not detect changes in women. These findings suggest that circumference-based %BF metrics may not be an appropriate tool to track changes in body composition during short duration training.

Comparison of Different Variants of the U.S. Army Occupational Physical Assessment Test.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Army Occupational Physical Assessment Test (OPAT) is a pre-enlistment physical employment screening assessment developed to place recruits and soldiers into Military Occupational Specialties (MOSs) based on their physical capabilities in order to optimize performance and limit injury. The OPAT consists of the seated power throw (SPT), strength deadlift (SDL), standing long jump, and interval aerobic run. During the scientific validation of the OPAT, two variants of the SPT and two variants of the SDL were used. Although the OPAT was validated using both variants for each test, U.S. Army scientists and policymakers have received queries regarding how these variants compare to each other. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare different variants of the SPT and SDL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two participants (14 male and 18 female) between the ages of 18 and 42 years visited the laboratory on one occasion and performed two variants of the SPT (seated on the ground [the current OPAT standard] versus seated in a chair with a 35 cm seat height) and two variants of the SDL (using a hex-bar [the current OPAT standard] versus using paired dumbbells). Testing order for the different variants was randomized. The protocol was approved by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: Performing the SPT from a chair significantly (P < .05) increased performance when compared to performing the SPT from the ground (5.4 ± 1.3 m versus 5.0 ± 1.4 m, respectively). Values for the two SPT variants were correlated (tau = 0.90). Performing the SDL using the hex-bar significantly increased the maximal weight lifted when compared to performing the SDL using paired dumbbells (86.9 ± 18.4 kg versus 83.1 ± 18.0 kg, respectively). Values for the two SDL variants were correlated (tau = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Performing different variants of the SPT and SDL influenced the resulting score. Although these findings do not alter the administration or scoring of the OPAT, they do provide a valuable reference in the event of future inquiries regarding the development of the OPAT.