| Literature DB >> 32456098 |
Javier Raya-González1, Daniel Castillo1, Marta Domínguez-Díez1, José Luis Hernández-Davó1.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the differences in power production between movement phases (i.e., concentric and eccentric) during the execution of resistance exercises with a flywheel device, differentiating between execution regimes (i.e., bilateral, unilateral dominant leg and unilateral non-dominant leg). Twenty young elite soccer players (U-17) performed two sets of six repetitions of the bilateral half-squat (inertia 0.025 kg·m-2) and the lateral-squat exercise (inertia 0.010 kg·m-2) on a flywheel device. During the testing sessions, mean and peak power in concentric (MPcon) and eccentric (MPecc) phases were recorded. The non-dominant leg showed higher values in all power variables measured, although substantial differences were only found in MPecc (ES = 0.40, likely) and PPcon (ES = 0.36, possibly). On the other hand, for both exercises, MPcon was higher than MPecc (ES = -0.57 to -0.31, possibly/likely greater), while only PPecc was higher than PPcon in the dominant lateral-squat (ES = 0.44, likely). These findings suggest that young soccer players have difficulty in reaching eccentric-overload during flywheel exercises, achieving it only with the dominant leg. Therefore, coaches should propose precise preventive programs based on flywheel devices, attending to the specific characteristics of each limb, as well as managing other variables to elicit eccentric-overload.Entities:
Keywords: iso-inertial devices; maximal power output; resistance training; rotary device; team sports
Year: 2020 PMID: 32456098 PMCID: PMC7277616 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17103671
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Half-squat exercise performed in the study.
Figure 2Lateral-squat exercise performed in the study.
Mean differences ± SD in power variables among dominant and non-dominant limbs along with effect sizes (ES) and qualitative inferences.
| Variables | Dominant Leg | Non-Dominant Leg | Mean Difference; ± 90% CL | ES; ± 90% CL | Qualitative Inference | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPcon (W) | 244.89 ± 85.04 | 265.62 ± 87.43 | 9.1; ±24.8 | 0.23; ± 0.55 | Unclear | 54/37/9 |
| MPecc (W) | 194.18 ± 77.72 | 226.44 ± 73.07 | 19.2; ±27.7 | 0.40; ± 0.52 | Likely Small | 75/23/2 |
| PPcon (W) | 410.33 ± 151.26 | 467.08 ± 156.83 | 14.8; ± 26.6 | 0.36; ± 0.55 | Possibly Small | 69/27/5 |
| PPecc (W) | 466.58 ± 161.26 | 479.69 ± 167.48 | 2.1; ± 23.0 | 0.07; ± 0.53 | Unclear | 35/46/19 |
Abbreviations: CL = confidence limits; SD = standard deviation; MPcon = concentric mean power; MPecc = eccentric mean power; PPcon = concentric peak power; PPecc = eccentric peak power.
Figure 3Practical differences in power variables between movement phases.