Literature DB >> 26957933

Comparison Between Pre-Exhaustion and Traditional Exercise Order on Muscle Activation and Performance in Trained Men.

Enrico Gori Soares1, Lee E Brown2, Willy Andrade Gomes1, Daniel Alves Corrêa1, Érica Paes Serpa1, Josinaldo Jarbas da Silva1, Guanis de Barros Vilela Junior1, Gustavo Zorzi Fioravanti1, Marcelo Saldanha Aoki3, Charles Ricardo Lopes4, Paulo Henrique Marchetti5.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to measure the acute effects of pre-exhaustion vs. traditional exercise order on neuromuscular performance and sEMG in trained men. Fourteen young, healthy, resistance trained men (age: 25.5 ± 4.0 years, height: 174.9 ± 4.1 cm, and total body mass: 80.0 ± 11.1 kg) took part of this study. All tests were randomized and counterbalanced for all subjects and experimental conditions. Volunteers attended one session in the laboratory. First, they performed ten repetition maximum (10RM) tests for each exercise (bench press and triceps pushdown) separately. Secondly, they performed all three conditions at 10RM: pre-test (bench press and triceps pushdown, separately), pre-exhaustion (triceps pushdown+bench press, PE) and traditional (bench press+triceps pushdown, TR), and rested 30 minutes between conditions. Results showed that pre-test was significantly greater than PE (p = 0.031) but not different than TR, for total volume load lifted. There was a significant difference between the pre-test and the time-course of lactate measures (p = 0.07). For bench press muscle activity of the pectoralis major, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.006, PE: p = 0.016, and TR: p = 0.005). Also, for muscle activity of the triceps brachii, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.001, PE: p = 0.005, and TR: p = 0.006). For triceps pushdown, muscle activity of the triceps brachii, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.006, PE: p = 0.016, and TR: p = 0.005). For RPE, there were no significant differences between PE and TR (p = 0.15). Our results suggest that exercise order decreases repetitions performed, however, neuromuscular fatigue, lactate, and RPE are not impacted. The lack of difference in total volume load lifted between PE and TR might explain, at least in part, the similar metabolic and perceptual responses. Key pointsThe effects of different exercise order schemes (e.g. PE and TR) on muscle activity and strength performance indicated that similar responses were observed when comparing these schemes.Strength and conditioning coaches should consider these results when prescribing resistance training programs.The primary target (e.g. muscle group) of the training session should trained first, when fatigue level low, in order to maximize training outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Exercise performance; biomechanics; resistance training

Year:  2016        PMID: 26957933      PMCID: PMC4763829     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  22 in total

1.  Effect of pre-exhaustion exercise on lower-extremity muscle activation during a leg press exercise.

Authors:  Jesper Augustsson; Roland Thomeé; Per Hörnstedt; Jens Lindblom; Jon Karlsson; Gunnar Grimby
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Sample size estimation: how many individuals should be studied?

Authors:  John Eng
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Exercise order in resistance training.

Authors:  Roberto Simão; Belmiro Freitas de Salles; Tiago Figueiredo; Ingrid Dias; Jeffrey M Willardson
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Influence of exercise order in a resistance-training exercise session.

Authors:  Luuk P B Spreuwenberg; William J Kraemer; Barry A Spiering; Jeff S Volek; Disa L Hatfield; Ricardo Silvestre; Jakob L Vingren; Maren S Fragala; Keijo Häkkinen; Robert U Newton; Carl M Maresh; Steven J Fleck
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Effects of exercise order on upper-body muscle activation and exercise performance.

Authors:  Paulo Gentil; Elke Oliveira; Valdinar de Araújo Rocha Júnior; Jake do Carmo; Martim Bottaro
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Influence of exercise order on muscle damage during moderate-intensity resistance exercise and recovery.

Authors:  Christianne Pereira Giesbrecht Chaves; Roberto Simão; Humberto Miranda; João Ribeiro; Jorge Soares; Belmiro Salles; António Silva; Maria Paula Mota
Journal:  Res Sports Med       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.674

7.  Dynamic training volume: a construct of both time under tension and volume load.

Authors:  Quan T Tran; David Docherty
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2006-12-15       Impact factor: 2.988

8.  Influence of exercise order on the number of repetitions performed and perceived exertion during resistance exercises.

Authors:  Roberto Simão; Paulo de Tarso Veras Farinatti; Marcos Doederlein Polito; Alex Souto Maior; Steven J Fleck
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.775

9.  Interaction among Skeletal Muscle Metabolic Energy Systems during Intense Exercise.

Authors:  Julien S Baker; Marie Clare McCormick; Robert A Robergs
Journal:  J Nutr Metab       Date:  2010-12-06

10.  Effects of resistance exercise order on the number of repetitions performed to failure and perceived exertion in untrained young males.

Authors:  Nuno Romano; José Vilaça-Alves; Helder M Fernandes; Francisco Saavedra; Gabriel Paz; Humberto Miranda; Roberto Simão; Jefferson Novaes; Victor Reis
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 2.193

View more
  7 in total

1.  Effects of Plyometric Training on Neuromuscular Performance in Youth Basketball Players: A Pilot Study on the Influence of Drill Randomization.

Authors:  Sebastian Hernández; Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo; Cristian Álvarez; Javier Sanchez-Sanchez; Jason Moran; Lucas A Pereira; Irineu Loturco
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  Pre-exhaustion Training, a Narrative Review of the Acute Responses and Chronic Adaptations.

Authors:  Thiago Barbosa Trindade; Ragami Chaves Alves; Bruno Magalhães DE Castro; Matheus Alcântara DE Medeiros; Jason Azevedo DE Medeiros; Paulo Moreira Silva Dantas; Jonato Prestes
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2022-03-01

3.  Maximizing Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review of Advanced Resistance Training Techniques and Methods.

Authors:  Michal Krzysztofik; Michal Wilk; Grzegorz Wojdała; Artur Gołaś
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Acute Effect of Upper-Lower Body Super-Set vs. Traditional-Set Configurations on Bar Execution Velocity and Volume.

Authors:  Guillermo Peña García-Orea; David Rodríguez-Rosell; Daniel Segarra-Carrillo; Marzo Edir Da Silva-Grigoletto; Noelia Belando-Pedreño
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-14

5.  The Pre-Exhaustion Method Does Not Increase Muscle Activity in Target Muscle During Strength Training in Untrained Individuals.

Authors:  Rafael A Fujita; Nilson R S Silva; Bruno L S Bedo; Matheus M Gomes
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 2.923

6.  Immediate and Delayed Effects of Cupping Therapy on Reducing Neuromuscular Fatigue.

Authors:  Xiao Hou; Xiaoling Wang; Lisa Griffin; Fuyuan Liao; Joseph Peters; Yih-Kuen Jan
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-07-01

7.  Effects of Pre-exhaustion Versus Traditional Resistance Training on Training Volume, Maximal Strength, and Quadriceps Hypertrophy.

Authors:  Thiago Barbosa Trindade; Jonato Prestes; Leônidas Oliveira Neto; Radamés Maciel Vitor Medeiros; Ramires Alsamir Tibana; Nuno Manuel Frade de Sousa; Eduardo Estevan Santana; Breno Guilherme de A T Cabral; Whitley Jo Stone; Paulo Moreira Silva Dantas
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 4.566

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.