Postactivation performance enhancement: Does conditioning one arm augment performance in the other?

The purpose was to determine whether postactivation performance enhancement is specific to the muscle being conditioned or if it is also observed within the homologous muscles of the contralateral limb (after accounting for the warm-up and random error). We also investigated whether this differed based on training status or muscle size. One hundred seven participants (75 untrained; 32 trained) participated in four sessions. Visit 1 included baseline measurements and familiarization. Visits 2-4 included the completion of one of the three experimental conditions: (a) control, (b) same side and (c) crossover completed in a randomized order. The control condition completed all testing except for the conditioning contraction. The same side condition completed the conditioning contraction on the same side as the strength test. The crossover condition completed the conditioning on the arm opposite to the strength test. The variable of interest was the change from baseline in isokinetic strength. Our analysis indicated that of the hypotheses compared, the posterior probabilities (posterior probability of 0.506) favoured the hypothesis that the effect was local and greatest in those who were resistance trained [mean (SD) of 1.4 (2.2) Nm over the control in those resistance trained]. We found no relationship between muscle size and postactivation performance enhancement. In conclusion, there is an influence of training status pertaining to the postactivation performance enhancement effect but no influence from baseline muscle size. It appears unlikely that the effect is due to a systemic mechanism.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes