Contralateral protective effect against repeated bout of damaging exercise: A meta-analysis

Resistance Exercise for Improving Running Economy and Running Biomechanics and Decreasing Running-Related Injury Risk: A Narrative Review

It is well-accepted that at least a certain amount of resistance exercise (RE) is recommended for most endurance athletes. In this review, we aim to summarize the evidence regarding the effects of RE on running economy, running biomechanics, and running-related injury risk in endurance runners. The evidence robustly shows that lower limb RE is effective for improving running economy and performance, with a combination of strength and plyometric training being recommended to improve RE. Isometric training is also emerging as a possible alternative to implement during periods of high overall training load. Lower limb RE may change some aspects of joint kinematics during running; however, the evidence regarding the effects on kinetics is limited. Lower limb RE may help reduce running-related injury risk, but further evidence is needed.

Effect of repeated eccentric exercise on muscle damage markers and motor unit control strategies in arm and hand muscle

To examine the contralateral repeated bout effect (CL-RBE) on muscle damage markers and motor unit (MU) control strategies, seventeen healthy adults performed two bouts of 60 eccentric contractions with elbow flexor (EF group; n ​= ​9) or index finger abductor (IA group; n ​= ​8) muscles, separated by 1 week. All participants randomly performed eccentric exercise on either the right or left arm or hand muscles, and muscle damage markers and submaximal trapezoid contraction tests were conducted pre, post, 1- and 2-day post eccentric protocol. One week after the first bout, the same exercise protocol and measurements were performed on the contralateral muscles. Surface electromyographic (EMG) signals were collected from biceps brachii (BB) or first dorsal interosseous (FDI) during maximal and submaximal tests. The linear regression analyses were used to examine MU recruitment threshold versus mean firing rate and recruitment threshold versus derecruitment threshold relationships. EMG amplitude from BB (bout 1 vs. bout 2 ​= ​65.71% ​± ​22.92% vs. 43.05% ​± ​18.97%, p ​= ​0.015, d ​= ​1.077) and the y-intercept (group merged) from the MU recruitment threshold versus derecruitment threshold relationship (bout 1 vs. bout 2 ​= ​−7.10 ​± ​14.20 vs. 0.73 ​± ​16.24, p ​= ​0.029, d ​= ​0.513) at 50% MVIC were significantly different between two bouts. However, other muscle damage markers did not show any CL-RBE in both muscle groups. Therefore, despite changes in muscle excitation and MU firing behavior, our results do not support the existence of CL-RBE on BB and FDI muscles.