The influence of lightweight wearable resistance on whole body coordination during sprint acceleration among Australian Rules football players

Rapid acceleration is an important quality for field-based sport athletes. Technical factors contribute to acceleration and these can be deliberately influenced by coaches through implementation of constraints, which afford particular coordinative states or induce variability generally. Lightweight wearable resistance is an emerging training tool, which can act as a constraint on acceleration. At present, however, the effects on whole body coordination resulting from wearable resistance application are unknown. To better understand these effects, five male Australian Rules football athletes performed a series of 20 m sprints with either relatively light or heavy wearable resistance applied to the anterior or posterior aspects of the thighs or shanks. Whole body coordination during early acceleration was examined across eight wearable resistance conditions and compared with baseline (unresisted) acceleration coordination using group- and individual-level hierarchical cluster analysis. Self-organising maps and a joint-level distance matrix were used to further investigate specific kinematic changes in conditions where coordination differed most from baseline. Across the group, relatively heavy wearable resistance applied to the thighs resulted in the greatest difference to whole body coordination compared with baseline acceleration. On average, heavy posterior thigh wearable resistance led to altered pelvic position and greater hip extension, while heavy anterior thigh wearable resistance led to accentuated movement at the shoulders in the transverse and sagittal planes. These findings offer a useful starting point for coaches seeking to use wearable resistance to promote adoption of greater hip extension or upper body contribution during acceleration. Importantly, individuals varied in how they responded to heavy thigh wearable resistance, which coaches should be mindful of.

Acute locomotor, heart rate and neuromuscular responses to added wearable resistance during soccer-specific training

PURPOSE

Investigate acute locomotor, internal (heart rate (HR) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE)) and neuromuscular responses to using wearable resistance loading for soccer-specific training.

METHODS

Twenty-six footballers from a French 5th division team completed a 9-week parallel-group training intervention (intervention group: n = 14, control: n = 12). The intervention group trained with wearable resistance (200-g on each posterior, distal-calf) for full-training sessions on Day + 2, D + 4 and unloaded on D + 5. Between-group differences in locomotor (GPS) and internal load were analyzed for full-training sessions and game simulation drills. Neuromuscular status was evaluated using pre- and post-training box-to-box runs. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-modelling, effect size ±90% confidence limits (ES ± 90%CL) and magnitude-based decisions.

RESULTS

Full-training sessions: Relative to the control, the wearable resistance group showed greater total distance (ES [lower, upper limits]: 0.25 [0.06, 0.44]), sprint distance (0.27 [0.08, 0.46]) and mechanical work (0.32 [0.13, 0.51]). Small game simulation (<190 m2/player): wearable resistance group showed small decreases in mechanical work (0.45 [0.14, 0.76]) and moderately lower average HR (0.68 [0.02, 1.34]). Large game simulation (>190 m2/player): no meaningful between-group differences were observed for all variables. Training induced small to moderate neuromuscular fatigue increases during post-training compared to pre-training box-to-box runs for both groups (Wearable resistance: 0.46 [0.31, 0.61], Control: 0.73 [0.53, 0.93]).

CONCLUSION

For full training, wearable resistance induced higher locomotor responses, without affecting internal responses. Locomotor and internal outputs varied in response to game simulation size. Football-specific training with wearable resistance did not impact neuromuscular status differently than unloaded training.

Impacts of Wearable Resistance Placement on Running Efficiency Assessed by Wearable Sensors: A Pilot Study

Wearable resistance training is widely applied to enhance running performance, but how different placements of wearable resistance across various body parts influence running efficiency remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the impacts of wearable resistance placement on running efficiency by comparing five running conditions: no load, and an additional 10% load of individual body mass on the trunk, forearms, lower legs, and a combination of these areas. Running efficiency was assessed through biomechanical (spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic) variables using acceleration-based wearable sensors placed on the shoes of 15 recreational male runners (20.3 ± 1.23 years) during treadmill running in a randomized order. The main findings indicate distinct effects of different load distributions on specific spatiotemporal variables (contact time, flight time, and flight ratio, p ≤ 0.001) and kinematic variables (footstrike type, p < 0.001). Specifically, adding loads to the lower legs produces effects similar to running with no load: shorter contact time, longer flight time, and a higher flight ratio compared to other load conditions. Moreover, lower leg loads result in a forefoot strike, unlike the midfoot strike seen in other conditions. These findings suggest that lower leg loads enhance running efficiency more than loads on other parts of the body.

Effects of Different Wearable Resistance Placements on Running Stability

Stability during running has been recognized as a crucial factor contributing to running performance. This study aimed to investigate the effects of wearable equipment containing external loads on different body parts on running stability. Fifteen recreational male runners (20.27 ± 1.23 years, age range 19-22 years) participated in five treadmill running conditions, including running without loads and running with loads equivalent to 10% of individual body weight placed on four different body positions: forearms, lower legs, trunk, and a combination of all three (forearms, lower legs, and trunk). A tri-axial accelerometer-based smartphone sensor was attached to the participants' lumbar spine (L5) to record body accelerations. The largest Lyapunov exponent (LyE) was applied to individual acceleration data as a measure of local dynamic stability, where higher LyE values suggest lower stability. The effects of load distribution appear in the mediolateral (ML) direction. Specifically, running with loads on the lower legs resulted in a lower LyE_ML value compared to running without loads (p = 0.001) and running with loads on the forearms (p < 0.001), trunk (p = 0.001), and combined segments (p = 0.005). These findings suggest that running with loads on the lower legs enhances side-to-side local dynamic stability, providing valuable insights for training.

Lower-limb wearable resistance overloads joint angular velocity during early acceleration sprint running

Lower-limb wearable resistance (WR) facilitates targeted resistance-based training during sports-specific movement tasks. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of two different WR placements (thigh and shank) on joint kinematics during the acceleration phase of sprint running. Eighteen participants completed maximal effort sprints while unloaded and with 2% body mass thigh- or shank-placed WR. The main findings were as follows: 1) the increase to 10 m sprint time was small with thigh WR (effect size [ES] = 0.24), and with shank WR, the increase was also small but significant (ES = 0.33); 2) significant differences in peak joint angles between the unloaded and WR conditions were small (ES = 0.23-0.38), limited to the hip and knee joints, and <2° on average; 3) aside from peak hip flexion angles, no clear trends were observed in individual difference scores; and, 4) thigh and shank WR produced similar reductions in average hip flexion and extension angular velocities. The significant overload to hip flexion and extension velocity with both thigh- and shank-placed WR may be beneficial to target the flexion and extension actions associated with fast sprint running.

Thigh loaded wearable resistance increases sagittal plane rotational work of the thigh resulting in slower 50-m sprint times

This study determined the acute changes in rotational work with thigh attached wearable resistance (WR) of 2% body mass during 50-m sprint-running. Fourteen athletes completed sprints with, and without, WR in a randomised order. Sprint times were measured via timing gates at 10-m and 50-m. Rotational kinematics were obtained over three phases (steps 1-2, 3-6 and 7-10) via inertial measurement unit attached to the left thigh. Quantification of thigh angular displacement and peak thigh angular velocity was subsequently derived to measure rotational work. The WR condition was found to increase sprint times at 10-m (1.4%, effect size [ES] 0.38, p 0.06) and 50-m (1.9%, ES 0.55, p 0.04). The WR condition resulted in trivial to small increases in angular displacement of the thigh during all phases (0.6-3.4%, ES 0.04-0.26, p 0.09-0.91). A significant decrease in angular velocity of the thigh was found in all step phases (-2.5% to -8.0%, ES 0.17-0.51, p < 0.001-0.04), except extension in step phase 1 with the WR. Rotational work was increased (9.8-18.8%, ES 0.35-0.53, p < 0.001) with WR in all phases of the sprint. Thigh attached WR provides a means to significantly increase rotational work specific to sprinting.

The assessment of a novel lower body resistance garment as a mechanism to increase the training stimulus during running: a randomised cross-over study

BACKGROUND

This study examined the physiological and perceived impact of wearing a novel lower body resistance garment during exercise and recovery.

METHODS

Using a randomised cross-over design, 15 recreationally-active males performed 2 × 10-min steady-state runs followed by a 10-min passive recovery with concomitant monitoring of oxygen consumption (V̇O2), heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE; exercise portion only), wearing either the resistance garment (experimental) or running shorts (control).

RESULTS

During exercise, there was a trend for V̇O2 and RPE to be higher (4.5% and 7.7% respectively) in experimental than control (V̇O2: r = 0.24, p > 0.05; RPE: r = 0.32, p > 0.05) and for HR to be lower (- 0.4%, r = - 0.05, p > 0.05). During recovery, V̇O2 and HR tended to be lower (4.7% and 4.3% respectively) in experimental than control (V̇O2: r = - 0.32, p > 0.05; HR: r = - 0.27, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Though effects were trivial to small, and not statistically significant, these findings provide proof of concept and suggest that this garment design may increase the training stimulus during running and aid post-exercise recovery.

Does Warming Up With Wearable Resistance Influence Internal and External Training Load in National Level Soccer Players?

BACKGROUND

Adding wearable resistance (WR) to training results in superior performance compared with unloaded conditions. However, it is unclear if adding WR during warm-up influences training load (TL) in the subsequent session. The aim of this research was to track TL in soccer players during the transition from late preseason to early in-season and examine whether adding WR to the lower leg during a warm-up influenced TL measures during warm-ups and on-field training sessions after WR was removed.

HYPOTHESIS

The addition of WR worn on the lower legs during an on-field warm-up would lead to decreases in relatively high-intensity external TL metrics, such as distance covered >6.11 m∙s^-1 and acceleration and deceleration >/<3 m∙s^-2 and increases in internal TL during the warm-up, yet would have little effect on the subsequent training session when WR was removed.

STUDY DESIGN

Matched-pair randomized design.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

METHODS

A total of 28 soccer players were allocated to either a WR training (WRT = 14) or unloaded (control [CON] = 14) group. Both groups performed the same warm-up and on-field training for 8 weeks, with the WRT group wearing 200 g to 600 g loads on their lower leg during the warm-up. External TL was measured via global positioning system data and internal TL was assessed using session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE × time per session).

RESULTS

No statistically significant between-group differences (P ≥ 0.05) were identified for any TL measurement during either warm-ups or training sessions. Lower leg WR resulted in trivial to moderate effects for all external TL metrics (-16.9% to 2.40%; d = -0.61 to 0.14) and sRPE (-0.33%; d = -0.03) during the warm-up and trivial to small effects on all external TL metrics (-8.95% to -0.36%; d = -0.45 to -0.30) and sRPE (3.39%; d = 0.33) during training sessions.

CONCLUSION

Warming up with lower leg WR negatively affects neither the quality and quantity of the warm-up nor the subsequent training session once WR is removed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Using WR on the lower leg during on-field warm-ups may be a means to "microdose" strength training while not unduly increasing TL. However, further research is needed to determine the influence of WR on strength qualities.

Effects of forearm wearable resistance during accelerated sprints: From a standing start position

Fusiform weighted garments enable specific loading strategies during sport-specific movements. Loading the arms over during accelerated sprinting from a 2-point start position is pertinent to a variety of sporting performances. Fourteen sprint-trained individuals (age = 20.61 ± 1.16 years; height = 1.73 m ± 3.85 cm; body mass 65.33 ± 4.86 kg; personal best 100-m race time 11.40 ± 0.39 s) performed unloaded/loaded wearable resistance (WR) sprints. Between-condition step kinematics and kinetics were compared over four acceleration phases: steps 1-4, 5-8, 9-12 and 13-16. Sprint performance did not differ between unloaded and loaded WR at 10-m (-1.41%; ES = -0.32), or 30-m (-0.76%; ES = -0.24). Sprinting with forearm WR significantly decreased step frequency during phase two (p < 0.05, -3.42%; ES = -0.81) and three (-3.60%; ES = -0.86) and step velocity during phase four of the 30 m sprinting task (p < 0.05, -3.61%; ES: 0.91) only. There were no significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between step kinetics amongst the two conditions. Findings indicate that arm-loaded WR may provide specific sprinting overload for 2-point starting positions. This may be relevant to a wider sporting context such as field and team sport performances.

Waveform analysis of shank loaded wearable resistance during sprint running acceleration

Lower-limb wearable resistance (WR) provides a specific and targeted overload to the musculature involved in sprint running, however, it is unknown if greater impact forces occur with the additional limb mass. This study compared the contact times and ground reaction force waveforms between sprint running with no load and 2% body mass (BM) shank-positioned WR over 30 m. Fifteen male university-level sprint specialists completed two maximum effort sprints with each condition in a randomized order. Sprint running with shank WR resulted in trivial changes to contact times at 5 m, 10 m, and 20 m (effect size [ES] = <0.20, p > 0.05) and a small, significant increase to contact time at 30 m by 1.94% (ES = 0.25, p = 0.03). Significant differences in ground reaction force between unloaded and shank loaded sprint running were limited to the anterior-posterior direction and occurred between 20% and 30% of ground contact at 10 m, 20 m, and 30 m. Shank WR did not result in greater magnitudes of horizontal or vertical forces during the initial impact portion of ground contact. Practitioners can prescribe shank WR training with loads ≤2% BM without concern for increased risk of injurious impact forces.

Changes to horizontal force-velocity and impulse measures during sprint running acceleration with thigh and shank wearable resistance

This study determined the effects of two wearable resistance (WR) placements (i.e. thigh and shank) on horizontal force-velocity and impulse measures during sprint running acceleration. Eleven male athletes performed 50 m sprints either unloaded or with WR of 2% body mass attached to the thigh or shank. In-ground force platforms were used to measure ground reaction forces and determine dependent variables of interest. The main findings were: 1) increases in sprint times and reductions in maximum velocity were trivial to small when using thigh WR (0.00-1.93%) and small to moderate with shank WR (1.56-3.33%); 2) athletes maintained or significantly increased horizontal force-velocity mechanical variables with WR (effect size = 0.32-1.23), except for theoretical maximal velocity with thigh WR, and peak power, theoretical maximal velocity and maximal ratio of force with shank WR; 3) greater increases to braking and vertical impulses were observed with shank WR (2.72-26.3% compared to unloaded) than with thigh WR (2.17-12.1% compared to unloaded) when considering the entire acceleration phase; and, 4) no clear trends were observed in many of the individual responses. These findings highlight the velocity-specific nature of this resistance training method and provide insight into what mechanical components are overloaded by lower-limb WR.

Effects of acute wearable resistance loading on overground running lower body kinematics

Field-based sports require athletes to run sub-maximally over significant distances, often while contending with dynamic perturbations to preferred coordination patterns. The ability to adapt movement to maintain performance under such perturbations appears to be trainable through exposure to task variability, which encourages movement variability. The aim of the present study was to investigate the extent to which various wearable resistance loading magnitudes alter coordination and induce movement variability during running. To investigate this, 14 participants (three female and 11 male) performed 10 sub-maximal velocity shuttle runs with either no weight, 1%, 3%, or 5% of body weight attached to the lower limbs. Sagittal plane lower limb joint kinematics from one complete stride cycle in each run were assessed using functional data analysis techniques, both across the participant group and within-individuals. At the group-level, decreases in ankle plantarflexion following toe-off were evident in the 3% and 5% conditions, while increased knee flexion occurred during weight acceptance in the 5% condition compared with unloaded running. At the individual-level, between-run joint angle profiles varied, with six participants exhibiting increased joint angle variability in one or more loading conditions compared with unloaded running. Loading of 5% decreased between-run ankle joint variability among two individuals, likely in accordance with the need to manage increased system load or the novelty of the task. In terms of joint coordination, the most considerable alterations to coordination occurred in the 5% loading condition at the hip-knee joint pair, however, only a minority of participants exhibited this tendency. Coaches should prescribe wearable resistance individually to perturb preferred coordination patterns and encourage movement variability without loading to the extent that movement options become limited.

Wearable resistance sprint running is superior to training with no load for retaining performance in pre-season training for rugby athletes

This study determined the effects of a six-week lower-limb wearable resistance training (WRT) intervention on sprint running time, velocity, and horizontal force-velocity mechanical variables. Twenty-two collegiate/semi-professional rugby athletes completed pre- and post-intervention testing of three maximal effort 30 m sprints. A radar device was used to measure sprint running velocity from which horizontal force-velocity mechanical profiling variables were calculated. All athletes completed two dedicated sprint training sessions a week for six-weeks during pre-season. The intervention (wearable resistance, WR) group completed the sessions with 1% body mass load attached to the left and right shanks (i.e. 0.50% body mass load on each limb), whilst the control group completed the same sessions unloaded. For the control group, all variables were found to detrain significantly (p ≤ 0.05) over the training period with large detraining effects (ES > 0.80) for theoretical maximal horizontal force, slope of the force-velocity profile, maximal ratio of force, index of force application, 5 and 10 m times. For the WR group, there were no significant changes to any recorded variables (all p >  0.05) and all effects of training were trivial or small (ES < 0.50). After adjustment for baseline differences, significant between group differences were found for all variables (large effects, ES > 0.80) except theoretical maximal velocity, 30 m time, and maximal velocity. The addition of light wearable resistance to sprint training during a six-week pre-season block enables the maintenance of sprint performance and mechanical output qualities that otherwise would detrain due to inadequate training frequencies.

Acute Metabolic Changes with Lower Leg-Positioned Wearable Resistances during Submaximal Running in Endurance-Trained Runners

The aim of this study was to determine the acute metabolic effects of different magnitudes of wearable resistance (WR) attached to the lower leg during submaximal running. Fifteen endurance-trained runners (37.8 ± 6.4 years; 1.77 ± 0.7 m; 72.5 ± 9.8 kg; 58.9 ± 7.4 L/min VO_2max; 45.7 ± 5.8 min 10 K run time) completed seven submaximal running trials with WR loads of 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and 3% body mass (BM). Based on regression data, for every 1% BM increase of additional load, oxygen consumption (VO₂) increased by 2.56% and heart rate increased by 1.16%. Inferential based analysis identified that ≤1% BM were enough to elicit responses in VO₂, with a possible small increase (effect size (ES), 90% confidence interval (CI): 0.22, 0.17 to 0.39), while 3% BM loads produced a most likely very large increase (ES, 90% CI: 0.51, 0.42 to 0.60). A training load score was extrapolated using heart rate data to determine the amount of internal stress. An additional 1% BM resulted in an extra 0.39 (0.29 to 0.47) increase in internal stress over five minutes. Lower leg WR elicited substantial increases in lactate production from the lightest loading (0.5% BM), with a likely moderate increase (ES, 90% CI: 0.49, 0.30 to 0.95). Lower-leg positioned WR provides a running-specific overload with loads ≥ 1% BM resulting in substantial changes in metabolic responses.

Acute Metabolic Changes with Thigh-Positioned Wearable Resistances during Submaximal Running in Endurance-Trained Runners

The aim of this study was to determine the acute metabolic effects of different magnitudes of wearable resistance (WR) attached to the thigh during submaximal running. Twenty endurance-trained runners (40.8 ± 8.2 years, 1.77 ± 0.7 m, 75.4 ± 9.2 kg) completed six submaximal eight-minute running trials unloaded and with WRs of 1%, 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% body mass (BM), in a random order. The use of a WR resulted in a 1.6 ± 0.6% increase in oxygen consumption (VO₂) for every 1% BM of additional load. Inferential based analysis found that the loading of ≥3% BM was needed to elicit any substantial responses in VO₂, with an increase that was likely to be moderate in scale (effect size (ES) ± 90% confidential interval (CI): 0.24 ± 0.07). Using heart rate data, a training load score was extrapolated to quantify the amount of internal stress. For every 1% BM of WR, there is an extra 0.17 ± 0.06 estimated increase in training load. A WR ≥3% of BM was needed to elicit substantial responses in lactate production, with an increase which was very likely to be large in scale (ES ± 90% CI: 0.41 ± 0.18). A thigh-positioned WR provides a running-specific overload with loads ≥3% BM, resulting in substantial changes in metabolic responses.