Concurrent validation of the resistance intensity scale for exercise for monitoring velocity-based training with elastic bands

The aim was to evaluate the concurrent validity and reliability of the Resistance Intensity Scale for Exercise [RISE], which uses verbal descriptors, to quantify the intensity in velocity-based training with elastic bands. Eighteen trained volunteers performed parallel squats at maximum speed at 40%, 55%, 70%, and 85%1RM in four sessions, two for familiarization and two for reliability. Each set was stopped at a 10% intra-set velocity loss. Participants reported the perceived effort (easy-low-moderate-hard-maximal) at the first and last repetition. The concurrent validation was conducted with external load (i.e., mean propulsive velocity, weight, repetitions, and maximum power) and internal load parameters (i.e., heart rate). Participants' relative strength was calculated to assess its influence on the dependent variable. Acceptable concurrent validity and reliability (ICC>0.77, CV<21%) were observed, with the perceived effort being appropriate to differentiate between intensities and not being influenced by the participants' relative strength (p = 0.88). A categorical linear regression showed significant (p < 0.001) associations between the RISE scores and the weight, repetitions, and mean propulsive velocity (r = 0.43-0.63). The findings certify the usefulness of the perceived exertion for quantifying the intensity during velocity-based training with elastic bands. The perceived exertion of the first and last repetition favors a proper dosage of the training load.

A new sports garment with elastomeric technology optimizes physiological, mechanical, and psychological acute responses to pushing upper-limb resistance exercises

This study aimed to compare the mechanical (lifting velocity and maximum number of repetitions), physiological (muscular activation, lactate, heart rate, and blood pressure), and psychological (rating of perceived exertion) responses to upper-body pushing exercises performed wearing a sports elastomeric garment or a placebo garment. Nineteen physically active young adults randomly completed two training sessions that differed only in the sports garment used (elastomeric technology or placebo). In each session, subjects performed one set of seated shoulder presses and another set of push-ups until muscular failure. The dependent variables were measured immediately after finishing the set of each exercise. Compared to the placebo garment, the elastomeric garment allowed participants to obtain greater muscular activation in the pectoralis major (push-ups: p = 0.04, d = 0.49; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.64), triceps brachialis (push-ups, p < 0.01, d = 0.77; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.65), and anterior deltoid (push-ups: p < 0.01, d = 0.72; seated shoulder press: p < 0.01, d = 0.83) muscles. Similarly, participants performed more repetitions (push-ups: p < 0.01; d = 0.94; seated shoulder press: p = 0.03, d = 0.23), with higher movement velocity (all p ≤ 0.04, all d ≥ 0.47), and lower perceived exertion in the first repetition (push-ups: p < 0.01, d = 0.61; seated shoulder press: p = 0.05; d = 0.76) wearing the elastomeric garment compared to placebo. There were no between-garment differences in most cardiovascular variables (all p ≥ 0.10). Higher diastolic blood pressure was only found after the seated shoulder press wearing the elastomeric garment compared to the placebo (p = 0.04; d = 0.49). Finally, significantly lower blood lactate levels were achieved in the push-ups performed wearing the elastomeric garment (p < 0.01; d = 0.91), but no significant differences were observed in the seated shoulder press (p = 0.08). Overall, the findings of this study suggest that elastomeric technology integrated into a sports garment provides an ergogenic effect on mechanical, physiological, and psychological variables during the execution of pushing upper-limb resistance exercises.

Acute Effects of Back Squat Combined with Different Elastic Band Resistance on Vertical Jump Performance in Collegiate Basketball Players

The purpose of this study was to compare the acute effects of back squat exercise with or without elastic band on countermovement jump performance. Thirteen collegiate male basketball players (age: 20.5 ± 0.9 years; height: 188.5 ± 8.5 cm; body mass: 82.8 ± 12.9 kg) completed 5 familiarization and 4 experimental sessions separated by at least 48 hours. In the experimental sessions, the order of the conditions was randomized so that the participants performed 1 set of 3 repetitions of barbell back squat at 85% of their one-repetition maximum (1-RM), 1 set of 3 repetitions of back squat at 85% 1-RM with 20% variable resistance training (VRT), 30%VRT, or 40%VRT of the total load coming from the elastic band. Countermovement jump performance was assessed before (baseline), 30 seconds, 3 minutes, 6 minutes, and 9 minutes following each condition. Jump height, rate of force development, peak power, and vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, and medial gastrocnemius electromyography data were collected. Compared with the baseline, 30%VRT significantly improved jump height at 3 minutes post-exercise by 1.3 cm (P < 0.001) and 6 minutes post-exercise by 1.2 cm (P = 0.005); 40%VRT significantly improved jump height from 30 seconds up to the 9th minute (1.2 to 1.9 cm, P ≤ 0.036). The superior jump height was also accompanied by improved kinetic and electromyography data. No significant changes were observed in the barbell back squat and 20%VRT conditions. In conclusion, back squat at 85% 1-RM with 40% elastic band resistance led to superior vertical jump performance with an optimal time window of 3 minutes.

Bilateral back squat strength is increased during a 3-week undulating resistance training program with and without variable resistance in DIII collegiate football players

Background

Optimizing training adaptations is of the utmost importance for the strength and conditioning professional. The pre-season of any sport is particularly important to ensure preparedness of the athletes. In DIII Collegiate Football pre-season consists of approximately 3 weeks. The abbreviated time of the pre-season increases the importance of optimizing training using safe methods, including alternative loading strategies. The purpose of the current study was to determine if a 3-week variable resistance training VRT during an undulating (UL) resistance training program elicited a greater increase in back squat strength compared to traditional loading methods.

Methods and Materials

Forty DIII Football players (age range: 18-25 years) participated in a 3-week UL bilateral back squat (BBS) program. Both groups performed the BBS 3 times per week with a minimum of 24 hours between exercise sessions. The control group (C) (n = 20) (height = 182.3 + 5.1 cm, body mass: pre = 102.8 ± 17.7 kg, post = 104.1 ± 17.8 kg) used traditional loading methods (i.e., Olympic weights only) and the experimental group (E) (n = 20) (height = 180.7 ± 8.0 cm, body mass: pre = 100.3 ± 27.1 kg, post = 101.0 ± 27.7 kg) used traditional loading methods and variable resistance (i.e., resistance bands). The variable resistance accounted for approximately 20% of the total resistance while 80% of the resistance was supplied by traditional loading methods.

Results

When all data was pooled, subjects had a significant increase (p < 0.05) in 1-RM BBS from pre (154.2 + 26.1 kg) to post (166.8 + 26.2 kg), with a percent increase of 8.13% at the completion of the 3-week training program. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the C and E groups for muscular strength, muscular power, or vertical jump. Volume-loads were not significantly (p > 0.05) different between groups for any of the weeks (C: Week 1 = 858.1 + 101.3, Week 2 = 588.6 + 69.2, Week 3 = 332.5 + 38.9, Total = 1179.2 + 209.4 vs. E: Week 1 = 835.2 + 179.7, Week 2 = 572.2 + 123.4, Week 3 = 323.5 + 68.8, Total = 1730.9 + 371.8) or for the pre-season as a whole.

Conclusion

A traditional UL resistance training program and training program with variable resistance are both effective methods at increasing back squat strength during 3 weeks of training. Resistance band variable resistance (VR) does not enhance training effects within a 3-week mesocycle greater than traditional resistance.