| Literature DB >> 32205907 |
Guido M Filippi1, Luigi Fattorini2,3, Aurora Summa1, Alessandro Zagaglia4, Angelo Rodio4.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to assess the effects of a specific protocol, based on a focal muscle vibration, on mechanical parameters in an exercise composed of five repeated bouts of sprint interval tests (Wingate Anaerobic Tests, 10 seconds duration). Twenty-eight young male healthy subjects were randomized to two groups (VIB and CTRL). Peak power (PP), average peak between bouts (aP) and total exercise work (TW) were measured. In both groups, three different exercise sessions were carried out, interspersed by seven days: T0, T1 and T2. Between the baseline (T0) and T1, in the VIB group the intervention was administered on three successive days on quadriceps muscles, whereas a placebo administration was carried out in the CTRL group at the same time. At T1 (30 minutes after intervention) and T2 (7 days after) CTRL did not show any significant change, whereas VIB showed significant increases in PP (11.4%-9.3%), aP (6.6%-6.9%) and TW (5.7%-7.9%) with respect to T0. The results could be explained by an ameliorative agonist-antagonist balance, and this hypothesis is coherent with the literature. On the basis of the present findings, the investigated intervention might be usefully adopted to increase muscular power and endurance.Entities:
Keywords: Cycling exercise; Efficiency; Motor drive; Muscle work
Year: 2019 PMID: 32205907 PMCID: PMC7075225 DOI: 10.5114/biolsport.2020.89938
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Sport ISSN: 0860-021X Impact factor: 2.806
FIG. 1Experimental procedure. Upper row, left side, five WAnT bouts (open bars), preceded by a short warm up. Right side, intervention constituted by 9 vibratory applications (black bars) distributed throughout 3 consecutive days. Middle and lower rows, respectively, show the VIB and CTRL group study procedures.
Anthropometric data and relative biomechanical parameters at baseline in CTRL and VIB groups. Data presented as mean and sd. No statistical differences were detected.
| AGE (Y) | HIGH (m) | BM (kg) | PP (W/kg) | TW (RPM) | aP (RPM) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24±2.2 | 171 ±6.9 | 72 ±10.0 | 12.2 ±1.40 | 6930.7 ±695.44 | 168.4 ±11.4 | |
| 25 ±3.6 | 173 ±7.3 | 75 ±10.9 | 12.1 ±1.23 | 6963.8 ±420.6 | 169.7 ±9.9 |
FIG. 2Peak power (A), total work (B) and average peak (C) values, measured at the experimental time T0, T1, T2, in VIB (triangles, solid line) and CTRL (circles, dashed line) groups (p<0.05).
FIG. 3Two-dimensional plot showing total work (abscissa) and average peak (ordinate) percentage variations in CTRL (panel A) and VIB (panel B) groups. T1 vs T0: black circles; T2 vs T0: white circles.