Explosive Push-ups: From Popular Simple Exercises to Valid Tests for Upper-Body Power

A Comparison of the Plyometric Performance of Upper Limbs between Experienced and Non-Experienced Athletes

Although explosive upper-limb movements are far less studied than the equivalent lower-limb movements, they are important in many sports activities. The goal of this study was to explore, for the first time, the performance of street workout (SW) athletes who primarily focus on explosive and isometric strength in the upper limbs and to examine the effect of the contraction type on performance during a classical upper-body movement. Eighteen men took part in this study (age: 22.6 ± 2.1 years, height: 179.6 ± 7.1 cm, bodyweight: 71.9 ± 6.6 kg). Of these, nine practiced SW and nine practiced various team and individual sports-the latter serving as the control group. The athletes performed three different types of push-ups-one in a concentric way and two others in a plyometric way-and a fatigue-inducing push-up set. Jump heights, myoelectrical activities (through electromyography), muscle architecture, and hypertrophy (through ultrasonography) were measured. The results show no significant differences in jump height between the push-up types. Both groups confounded, but the SW athletes jumped on average 66 ± 21% higher than the control athletes (p < 0.05). There was no major difference in EMG between groups, regardless of the push-up type, but the SW athletes had a greater pectoralis major and anterior deltoid thickness as well as a greater pennation angle of the pectoralis major. The results suggest that the plyometric performance of the upper limbs does not follow the same pattern as that of the lower limbs. The SW group's greater capacity in performing explosive push-ups could be attributed to greater upper-body muscle hypertrophy and more efficient execution of the movement.

Comparing the Anthropometrics, Body Composition, and Strength Performance of Male and Female Italian Breaking Athletes: A Pilot Study

Breaking is a performative art that has recently undergone a process of sportification, developing into an aesthetic sport included in the 2024 Paris Olympic Games. Despite its growing worldwide popularity, there is a lack of research on Breaking. Accordingly, this pilot study's aim was twofold: (a) to provide an initial understanding of the anthropometric measures, body composition data, somatotype profiles, and strength performance of male (B-boys) and female (B-girls) Italian Breakers divided into elite (international) and sub-elite (national) levels and (b) to guide further research on the area, providing the methodological approach for future investigations. A total of 24 B-boys (elite n = 5; sub-elite n = 19) and 9 B-girls (elite n = 3; sub-elite n = 6) were included in this study. Descriptive analyses revealed that B-boys and B-girls displayed low height and weight (1.70 m (63.8 kg) and 1.58 m (54.2 kg), respectively), low levels of body fat percentages (10.3% and 17.6%, respectively), and a balanced mesomorph somatotype (2.28-4.64-2.69 and 2.34-5.16-2.38, respectively), revealing a marked development of muscular mass. Due to the small sample size, Welch's test and correlation analyses did not report any elite vs. sub-elite difference. It was hypothesized that Breakers' morphological profiles result from the selection procedures and training regimens related to Breaking aesthetic, athletic, and physiological demands.

Upper limb functional testing in athletes: A Delphi study

Background

Functional testing has recently become more and more popular to assess athletes, both for injury prevention, as well as in an objective of performance. However, the relationship between the results of these tests and performances (or injuries) or their interpretation remains unclear.

Objective

The aim of this study is to explore the usefulness, the characteristics, and the interpretation of the most frequently used upper-limb functional test.

Methods

Twenty-two experts with an excellent knowledge of upper limb functional tests and an expertise in sports medicine and/or sports training of at least 5 years were recruited. They answered to qualitative and quantitative questions about functional testing trough structured questionnaires (online).

Results

Four rounds were needed to reach a consensus about the usefulness as well as the characteristics of each test. Different sports-specific batteries of tests were also suggested by the experts and reached consensus. However, concerning the interpretation of the test, a consensus was only found for half of the tests considered.

Conclusion

The current study summarizes the characteristics and the usefulness of the most popular upper-limb functional tests. However, the interpretation of some tests will have to be further explored since no consensus was found for them.

Upper and Lower Limbs Acute Fatigue Did Not Mitigate Male Trained Air Force Soldiers' Marksmanship

In this study, we aimed to investigate the impact of acute fatigue on pistol shooting performance among Air Force marksmen. We compared the accuracy, precision, speed-accuracy trade-off, shooting cycle time, and hits on a silhouette target among 12 Brazilian Air Force servicemen (M age = 21.5, SD - 1.6 years) under both fatigue and non-fatigue conditions in a crossover design. In the fatigued condition, the participants performed a fatigue protocol composed of side runs, vertical jumps, push-ups, running, and burpees exercises before shooting. Participants performed the countermovement jump and the plyometric push-ups tests on a contact mat before and immediately after the fatigue protocol to compare the heights achieved pre- and post-fatigue. Paired t-tests showed a significant performance reduction of 34.36% and 40.02% for the countermovement jump and plyometric push-ups, respectively, indicating that participants were fatigued in their lower and upper limbs. In the non-fatigued condition, no exercise was performed before shooting. Results indicated no significant differences between conditions on shooting precision (p = .125; ES: .54), speed-accuracy trade-off (p = .261; ES = .33), hits within the silhouette (p = .167; ES = .41), or shooting cycle times (p = .868; ES = .05); but accuracy was greater (p = .025; ES: .54) when fatigued. We concluded that overall shooting performance was not impaired by physical fatigue, and shooting accuracy appeared to be improved. Perhaps physical fatigue was not enough to impair shooting accuracy in this young adult group, as accuracy decline is expected instead when shooters are in an exhausted state. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and test this presumption.

Progressing On-Court Rehabilitation After Injury: The Control-Chaos Continuum Adapted to Basketball

BACKGROUND: Sport-specific training is an integral component of returning to sport following injury. Frameworks designed to guide sport-specific rehabilitation need to integrate and adapt to the specific context of elite sport. The control-chaos continuum (CCC) is a flexible framework originally designed for on-pitch rehabilitation in elite football (soccer). The concepts underpinning the CCC transfer to other elite sport rehabilitation environments. CLINICAL QUESTION: How can practitioners and clinicians transfer the CCC to elite basketball, to support planning and return to sport? On-court rehabilitation is a critical sport-specific rehabilitation component of return to sport, yet there are no frameworks to guide practitioners when planning and delivering on-court rehabilitation. KEY RESULTS: Based on our experience working in the National Basketball Association, we report how the CCC framework can apply to elite basketball. We focus on the design and delivery of progressive training in the presence of injury in this basketball-specific edition of the CCC. Given the challenges when quantifying "load" in basketball, we encourage practitioners and clinicians to consider the qualitative aspects of performance such as skill, sport-specific movement, contact, and decision making. CLINICAL APPLICATION: The 5-phase framework describes training progression from high control, a return to on-court running, to high chaos, a return to "live" unrestricted basketball. The model can be adapted to both short- and long-term injuries based on injury and progression criteria. Strength and power "diagnostics" can be strategically implemented to enhance decision making throughout the return to sport continuum. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-12. Epub: 9 August 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11981.

Dietary nitrate ingested with and without pomegranate supplementation does not improve resistance exercise performance

This study tested the hypothesis that co-ingesting nitrate (NO₃^-)-rich beetroot juice (BR) and pomegranate powder (POM) would enhance neuromuscular performance during vertical countermovement jumps, explosive kneeling countermovement push-ups, and back squats compared to BR ingestion alone. Fifteen recreationally-active males were assigned in a double-blind, randomized, crossover design, to supplement in 3 conditions: (1) NO₃^--depleted beetroot juice (PL; 0.10 mmol NO₃^-) with two empty gelatin capsules; (2) NO₃^--rich beetroot juice (BR; 11.8 mmol NO₃^-) with two empty gelatin capsules, and (3) BR with 1,000 mg of POM powder in two capsules (BR + POM). Participants completed 5 countermovement jumps and 5 kneeling countermovement push-ups interspersed by 1  min of recovery. Subsequently, participants performed 2 sets of 2 × 70% one-repetition maximum back squats, interspersed by 2  min of recovery. Plasma [NO₃^-] and nitrite ([NO₂^-]) were elevated following BR and BR + POM compared with PL and POM (p < 0.001) with no differences between BR and BR + POM (p > 0.05) or PL and POM (p > 0.05). Peak power during countermovement jumps increased by 3% following BR compared to BR + POM (88.50 ± 11.46 vs. 85.80 ± 10.14 W/Kg^0.67, p = 0.009) but not PL (88.50 ± 11.46 vs. 85.58 ± 10.05 W/Kg^0.67, p = 0.07). Neuromuscular performance was not different between conditions during explosive kneeling push-ups and back squats (p > 0.05). These data provide insight into the efficacy of NO₃^- to modulate explosive resistance exercise performance and indicate that supplementing with BR alone or combined with POM has limited ergogenic potential on resistance exercise. Furthermore, caution is required when combining BR with POM, as this could compromise aspects of resistance exercise performance, at least when compared to BR ingested independently.

Comparison of ground reaction forces and joint kinematics between three different tempos during push-up exercise

Study aim

This study was aimed to analysis in detail how different tempos [2:0:2 (30 bpm), 1:0:1 (60 bpm), Explosive (EXP)] effect to ground reaction forces (vGRF) and joint kinematics of push-up exercise (PUP).

Material and methods

Twenty-four recreationally male athletes (age: 24.9 ± 3.6 years) participated in this study. Kinetic and kinematic data were obtained by load-cells and a motion analysis software. Data was analysed from a single repetition which is showed peak vGRF of dominant side during PUP. Joint velocities were calculated by taking the difference between the descent and ascent phases.

Results

There was significant difference between 2:0:2 (30 bpm) – EXP in terms of dominant side of shoulder (p ≤ 0.02) and between 1:0:1 (60 bpm) – EXP in the dominant elbow joint displacements (p ≤ 0.05). The velocity differences between the descent and ascent phases of shoulder and elbow joints were found statistically significant between tempos (p ≤ 0.05). In terms of range of motion (ROM) of right and left side, there was significant differences between tempos (p ≤ 0.001). No significant differences were found between all tempos in the ascent phase of right-left and left descent phase in terms of average vGRF (p > 0.05) except right descent average vGRF (p ≤ 0.02).

Conclusions

In conclusion, right-left sides of ROM was used most effectively in 2:0:2 (30 bpm) and 1:0:1 (60 bpm) tempos. Less displacement was also observed in EXP and when tempo increased percentage of peak vGRF (at elbow flexion phase for right-left sides) to total repetition decreased. Highest ascent and descent phase velocity differences (for right-left sides) and highest peak vGRF (elbow flexion phase) observed in EXP. This study shows that increasing tempo will result in more unsteady joint kinematics and more vGRF, so if the goal is controlled and safe PUP, tempo should be slow.

The validity of using one force platform to quantify whole-body forces, velocities, and power during a plyometric push-up

Background

Previous studies have typically measured velocity and power parameters during the push-up, either using one or two force platforms. The purpose of the study was to compare the force, velocity, and power parameters between the one-force-platform method and the two-force-platform method during plyometric push-ups.

Methods

Thirty-four physically active young adults participated in the study to perform the plyometric push-up. For the two-force-platform calculation method, the forces applied to the feet and hands were both measured. For the one-force-platform calculation method, the forces applied to the feet were assumed to be constant, while the forces applied to hands were measured by one force platform. Whole-body linear velocities were calculated based on the impulse and momentum theorem. Whole-body power was calculated as the product of the whole-body forces and velocities.

Results

The one-force-platform method overestimated the whole-body velocities and power compared with the two-force-platform method (1.39 ± 0.37 m/s vs. 0.90 ± 0.23 m/s, Cohen’s d = 1.59, p < 0.05; 1.63 ± 0.47 W/body weight vs. 1.03 ± 0.29 W/body weight, Cohen’s d = 1.49, p < 0.05). These differences were caused by the decreased forces applied to the feet compared to the initial value throughout most of the push-up phase. Large to perfect correlations (r = 0.55 – 0.99) were found for most variables between the two-force-platform and one-force-platform methods. Previous findings of push-up velocities and power using the two-force-platform and one-force-platform methods should be compared with caution. While the two-force-platform method is recommended, linear regression equations may be used to predict velocities and power parameters obtained from one force platform.

Conclusions

For those professionals who need to accurately quantify kinetic variables during the plyometric push-up, the two-force-platform method should be considered.

Upper body strength endurance evaluation: A comparison between the handgrip strength and three body weight tests

BACKGROUND: The hand-grip strength test has been widely adopted to evaluate upper limb strength. Other field based tests as push-ups and pull-ups are commonly used for the same purpose. It is however unclear if these may be used interchangeably for upper body strength evaluation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate strength endurance of the upper body and understand which test could be the most appropriate for upper body evaluation. METHODS: Thirty-eight healthy young male participants were tested with three tests comprised of: 1) push-ups (PS), 2) pull-ups (PL) and 3) parallel dips (PD) performed to exhaustion. Grip strength (GS), total number of repetitions, time-to-complete the test, repetition cadence and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were also retrieved for investigation. RESULTS: Repetitions, time-to-complete the test and repetition cadence significantly differed across the three tests (p< 0.001). No difference in the RPE was present. No correlation was present between GS and the other tests. No correlation was present between RPE and performance values and time-to-complete the tests. BMI was positively correlated to RPE in all tests. All tests strongly correlate to each other (PS vs. PL r= 0.55; PS vs. PD r= 0.64; PL vs. PD r= 0.70) and to time-to-complete the test (PS r= 0.79; PL r= 0.69; PD r= 0.66). Only the results of the PD correlate to their respective repetition cadence (r= 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: GS is not suitable to evaluate strength endurance. PS, PL and PD are all suitable to evaluate strength endurance. However, PD may be preferred to evaluate the upper body, if velocity also needs to be taken into account.

Core Endurance Relationships With Athletic and Functional Performance in Inactive People

Research regarding the relationship between core muscle endurance and performance is limited. The purpose of this study was to analyze the association between core/trunk endurance and athletic performance. Seventy-four healthy participants between 18 and 45 years old participated in this study (Age: 26.0 ± 6.5 years; Mass: 74.6 ± 12.8 kg; Height: 1.74 ± 0.08 m; BMI: 19.0 ± 6.8 kg/m²). The core endurance was measured using the McGill protocol, consisting of the following tests: trunk flexion, back extension, and side-bridge. Functional performance was evaluated with push-ups, sit to stand, T-run test, countermovement jump (CMJ), Yo-Yo test, maximum dynamic strength-one repetition maximum (1RM) and muscle power on the bench press, pull row, and leg press. The regression results between the McGill protocol (proxy for core/trunk endurance) and the dependent variables were: 1RM pull row: r² = 0.109 with p = 0.046; RM bench press: r² = 0.149 with p = 0.012; RM leg press: r² = 0.144 with p = 0.013 and power pull row: r² = 0.151 with p = 0.016; power bench press: r² = 0.136 with p = 0.026; power leg press: r² = 0.122 with p = 0.013), push-ups: r² = 0.157 with p < 0.001, sit to stand: r² = 0.198 with p < 0,001), functional movement score: r² = 0.209 with p < 0.001). Nevertheless, core endurance scores were not able to predict jump ability (r² = 0.014, p = 0.807) or agility (T-test: 0.036 with p = 0.497). In conclusion, core endurance exerted no significant influence the agility and jump performance but influenced the ability to run intermittently, exert maximum power and strength in different actions (push, pull, and lift exercises) related to the better quality of movement (FMS).

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses

Main aim of this study was examining validity and reliability of using a new specific Parkour repeated sprint ability test (SPRSA) for assessing repeated sprint ability while facing obstacles and establishing between-day reliability and sensitivity of SPRSA related to its physiological and performance responses. Thirteen high-level traceurs (three females) performed in random order and twice eight tests for assessing a total of 23 variables: SPRSA (a typical maximal-speed shuttle run interspersed with four Parkour competition-common fundamentals) and seven established fitness tests, core stability, hand-grip, vertical-jump, long-jump, pull-up, 300-m shuttle run (as a field test for anaerobic capacity), and Leger test. Except for muscular elasticity index of vertical jump test (intra-class Correlation Coefficient model 3,1 [ICC₃,₁] = 0.54 [fair]), fitness tests’ ICC₃,₁s resulted excellent (ICC₃,₁: 0.93–1.00). SPRSA total time and time of its fastest sprint (SPRSA peak time) were significantly correlated with the majority of core stability (r: −0.79 to 0.59; P < 0.01–0.05), jumping (r: −0.78 to 0.67; P < 0.01–0.05), pull-up tests (r: −0.86; P < 0.01), 300-m shuttle run test total time (r: 0.77–0.82; P < 0.01), and Leger test-estimated VO₂ max (r: −0.78; P < 0.01). Principal component analysis (PCA) of the 23 variables led to extraction of four significant components (each due to different variables’ combinations), which explained 90.2% of 23 variables’ total variance. SPRSA (i.e., total and peak time) showed high reliability (ICC₃,₁: 0.991–0.998 and standard-error-of-measurement %: 0.07–0.32). Finally, SPRSA showed high sensitivity (smallest-worthwhile-change %: 0.29–0.68). Considering its excellent logical and strong ecological validity, SPRSA may serve as a valid specific field test for Parkour sport. In addition, thanks to its high reliability and sensitivity, this test is suitable for monitoring, evaluating, and programming training processes for Parkour practitioners in repeated sprint ability involving crossing obstacles.