Acute Effects of Concurrent High-Intensity Interval Cycling and Bench-Press Loading on Upper- and Lower-Body Explosive Strength Performance

Non-Local Muscle Fatigue Impairs Mean Propulsive Velocity During Strength Loading in Strength-Trained Men

Purpose: This study examined the acute influence of a bench press (BP) loading on the explosive squat (SQ) performance and vice versa. Methods: Nineteen strength-trained men completed 2 experimental sessions consisting of either a SQ+BP loading or a BP+SQ loading with 3 × 5 + 3 × 3 repetitions at 80% of the 1-repetition maximum in a randomized order. SQ and BP mean propulsive velocity (MPV) were assessed during both loadings, at baseline (T0) as well as immediately after the first (T1) and second strength loading (T2). Results: Both BP and SQ MPV decreased between T0 and T1 in SQ+BP (-6.13 ± 6.13%, p = .014, g = 0.485 and -9.11 ± 7.23%, p < .001, g = 0.905, respectively) and BP+SQ (-15.15 ± 7.69%, p < .001, g = 1.316 and -7.18 ± 6.16%, p < .001, g = 0.724, respectively). Mean BP MPV was lower in set 2 to set 6 in SQ+BP when compared to BP+SQ (-7.90% - 9.88%, all p < .05, g = 0.523-0.808). Mean SQ MPV was lower in set 1 and set 4 in BP+SQ when compared to SQ+BP (-4.94% - 5.22%, all p < .001, g = 0.329-0.362). Conclusions: These results demonstrate that the presence of non-local muscle fatigue affects the movement velocity. Therefore, if a training program aims to perform strength training exercises with maximal movement velocity, it is essential to carefully evaluate whether upper and lower body exercises should be carried out within close proximity.

Comparative efficacy of concurrent training types on lower limb strength and muscular hypertrophy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective

This study aims to compare, through quantitative analysis, the effectiveness of different endurance training types on increasing lower limb strength and muscle cross-sectional area (MCSA) in concurrent training.

Methods

This systematic literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) [PROSPERO ID: CRD42023396886]. Web of Science, SportDiscuss, Pubmed, Cochrane, and Scopus were systematically searched from their inception date to October 20, 2023.

Results

A total of 40 studies (841 participants) were included in this meta-analysis. MCSA analysis showed that, compared to resistance training alone, concurrent high-intensity interval running training and resistance training and concurrent moderate-intensity continuous cycling training and resistance training were more effective (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI = -0.46 to 0.76, and SMD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.24 to 0.38 respectively), while other modalities of concurrent training not. Lower body maximal strength analysis showed that all modalities of concurrent training were inferior to resistance training alone, but concurrent high-intensity interval training and resistance training showed an advantage in four different concurrent training modalities (SMD = -0.08, 95% CI = -0.25 to 0.08). For explosive strength, only concurrent high-intensity interval training and resistance training was superior to resistance training (SMD = 0.06, 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.33).

Conclusion

Different endurance training types have an impact on the effectiveness of concurrent training, particularly on lower limb strength. Adopting high-intensity interval running as the endurance training type in concurrent training can effectively minimize the adverse effects on lower limb strength and MCSA.

Development and Interplay of Metabolic and Mechanical Performance Determinants Over an Annual Training Period in Adolescent National-Level Squad Swimmers

PURPOSE

The study examined the longitudinal interplay of anthropometric, metabolic, and neuromuscular development related to performance in adolescent national-level swimmers over 12 months.

METHODS

Seven male and 12 female swimmers (14.8 [1.3] y, FINA [International Swimming Federation] points 716 [51]) were tested before (T0) and after the preparation period (T1), at the season's peak (T2), and before the next season (T3). Anthropometric (eg, fat percentage) and neuromuscular parameters (squat and bench-press load-velocity profile) were assessed on dry land. Metabolic (cost of swimming [C], maximal oxygen uptake [V˙O2peak], and peak blood lactate [bLapeak]) and performance (sprinting speed [vsprint] and lactate thresholds [LT1 and 2]) factors were determined using a 500-m submaximal, 200-m all-out, 20-second sprint, and incremental test (+0.03 m·s-1, 3 min), respectively, in front-crawl swimming.

RESULTS

vsprint (+0.6%) and LT1 and 2 (+1.9-2.4%) increased trivially and slightly, respectively, from T0 to T2 following small to moderate strength increases (≥+10.2%) from T0 to T1 and V˙O2peak (+6.0%) from T1 to T2. Bench-press maximal strength and peak power correlated with vsprint from T0 to T2 (r ≥ .54, P < .05) and LT2 at T1 (r ≥ .47, P < .05). Changes in fat percentage and V˙O2peak (T2-T1 and T3-T2, r ≤ -.67, P < .01) and C and LT2 (T2-T0, r = -.52, P = .047) were also correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

Increases in strength and V˙O2peak from preparation to the competition period resulted in improved sprint and endurance performance. Across the season, upper-body strength was associated with vsprint and LT2, although their changes were unrelated.

Acute Effects of Combined Lower-Body High-Intensity Interval Training and Upper-Body Strength Exercise on Explosive Strength Performance in Naturally Menstruating Women

PURPOSE

We aimed at investigating the acute effects of lower-body high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on upper- and lower-body explosive strength assessed by mean propulsive velocity (MPV) in naturally menstruating women. In addition, we assessed the combination of lower-body HIIT and squat, as well as lower-body HIIT and bench press, on bench press and squat MPV.

METHODS

Thirteen women (age: 23 [2] y, menstrual cycle length: 28.4 [2.0] d) completed 2 training modalities on separate days (separated by 30 [4.2] d) consisting of HIIT followed by lower-body (HIIT + LBS) or upper-body (HIIT + UBS) strength loading. Squat and bench press MPV were assessed before HIIT (T0), after HIIT (T1), after the strength loading (T2), and 24 hours postloading (T3).

RESULTS

Mixed factorial analysis of variance indicated a significant effect for time in bench press and squat (P < .001) but not for interaction. Pairwise comparison showed that bench press MPV remained unchanged (P = 1.000) at T1 but was reduced at T2 compared with T0 (HIIT + LBS: -8.2% [3.9%], HIIT + UBS: -13.8% [12.1%], P < .001) and T1 (HIIT + LBS: -7.1% [3.2%], HIIT + UBS: -12.7% [8.7%], P < .001). Squat MPV decreased at T1 (HIIT + LBS: -6.0% [8.8%], HIIT + UBS: -4.8% [5.4%], P = .009) and was found to be decreased at T2 compared with T0 in both conditions (HIIT + LBS: -6.9% [3.3%], HIIT + UBS: -7.4% [6.1%], P < .001) but not compared with T1 (P = 1.000). Bench press and squat MPV returned to baseline at T3 compared with T0 (P > .050).

CONCLUSION

Lower- but not upper-body explosive strength was reduced by HIIT. HIIT combined with upper- or lower-body strength loading resulted in a reduction of squat and bench press explosive strength.