Comparison between Pre-Exhaustion and Traditional Exercise Order on Muscle Activation and Performance in Trained Men

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_SOARES_Comparison_between_PreExhaustion_and_Traditional_Exercise_Order_on_2016.PDF (406.32 KB)
Citações na Scopus
22
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
JOURNAL SPORTS SCIENCE & MEDICINE
Autores
SOARES, Enrico Gori
BROWN, Lee E.
GOMES, Willy Andrade
CORREA, Daniel Alves
SERPA, Erica Paes
SILVA, Josinaldo Jarbas da
VILELA JUNIOR, Guanis de Barros
FIORAVANTI, Gustavo Zorzi
AOKI, Marcelo Saldanha
LOPES, Charles Ricardo
Citação
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE AND MEDICINE, v.15, n.1, p.111-117, 2016
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
The purpose of this study was to measure the acute effects of pre-exhaustion vs. traditional exercise order on neuromuscular performance and sEMG in trained men. Fourteen young, healthy, resistance trained men (age: 25.5 +/- 4.0 years, height: 174.9 +/- 4.1 cm, and total body mass: 80.0 +/- 11.1 kg) took part of this study. All tests were randomized and counterbalanced for all subjects and experimental conditions. Volunteers attended one session in the laboratory. First, they performed ten repetition maximum (10RM) tests for each exercise (bench press and triceps pushdown) separately. Secondly, they performed all three conditions at 10RM: pre-test (bench press and triceps pushdown, separately), pre-exhaustion (triceps push-down+ bench press, PE) and traditional (bench press+triceps pushdown, TR), and rested 30 minutes between conditions. Results showed that pre-test was significantly greater than PE (p = 0.031) but not different than TR, for total volume load lifted. There was a significant difference between the pre-test and the time-course of lactate measures (p = 0.07). For bench press muscle activity of the pectoralis major, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.006, PE: p = 0.016, and TR: p = 0.005). Also, for muscle activity of the triceps brachii, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.001, PE: p = 0.005, and TR: p = 0.006). For triceps pushdown, muscle activity of the triceps brachii, the last repetition was significantly greater than the first repetition (pre-test: p = 0.006, PE: p = 0.016, and TR: p = 0.005). For RPE, there were no significant differences between PE and TR (p = 0.15). Our results suggest that exercise order decreases repetitions performed, however, neuromuscular fatigue, lactate, and RPE are not impacted. The lack of difference in total volume load lifted between PE and TR might explain, at least in part, the similar metabolic and perceptual responses.
Palavras-chave
Exercise performance, resistance training, biomechanics
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/13996
Referências
  1. Ratamess NA, 2009, MED SCI SPORT EXER, V41, P687, DOI 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181915670
  2. Hermens HJ, 2000, J ELECTROMYOGR KINES, V10, P361, DOI 10.1016/S1050-6411(00)00027-4
  3. Brennecke A, 2009, J STRENGTH COND RES, V23, P1933, DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b73b8f
  4. Simao R, 2007, J STRENGTH COND RES, V21, P23, DOI 10.1519/00124278-200702000-00005
  5. Chaves CPG, 2013, RES SPORTS MED, V21, P176, DOI 10.1080/15438627.2012.738439
  6. Simao R, 2012, SPORTS MED, V42, P251, DOI 10.2165/11597240-000000000-00000
  7. Rhea MR, 2004, J STRENGTH COND RES, V18, P918, DOI 10.1519/00124278-200411000-00040
  8. Brooks GA, 2000, MED SCI SPORT EXER, V32, P790, DOI 10.1097/00005768-200004000-00011
  9. Charro MA, 2010, J SPORT MED PHYS FIT, V50, P229
  10. Spreuwenberg LPB, 2006, J STRENGTH COND RES, V20, P141
  11. Augustsson J, 2003, J STRENGTH COND RES, V17, P411
  12. Lodo L, 2012, J SPORT MED PHYS FIT, V52, P483
  13. Eng J, 2003, RADIOLOGY, V227, P309, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2272012051
  14. Romano N, 2013, J HUM KINET, V39, P177, DOI 10.2478/hukin-2013-0080
  15. Tran QT, 2006, J SPORT SCI MED, V5, P707
  16. Clemons JM, 1997, J STRENGTH COND RES, V11, P82
  17. [Anonymous], 2005, J STRENGTH COND RES
  18. Gentil P, 2007, J STRENGTH COND RES, V21, P1082, DOI 10.1519/00124278-200711000-00018
  19. Zwarts MJ, 2008, CLIN NEUROPHYSIOL, V119, P2, DOI 10.1016/j.clinph.2007.09.126
  20. Foster C, 2001, J STRENGTH COND RES, V15, P109, DOI 10.1519/00124278-200102000-00019
  21. Baker JS, 2010, J NUTR METAB, V2010, P1, DOI 10.1155/2010/905612
  22. Bellezza PA, 2009, J STRENGTH COND RES, V23, P203, DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181889156
  23. Cram J, 1998, INTRO SURFACE ELECTR
  24. Fonseca RM, 2014, J STRENGTH COND RES, V28, P3085, DOI 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000539
  25. Foster C., 2001, SPORTS MED, P3
  26. Gardiner P. F., 2011, ADV NEUROMUSCULAR EX
  27. Marchetti PH, 2011, TERAPIA MANUAL, V9, P548
  28. Monteiro W., 2005, BRAZ J SPORTS MED, V11, P146
  29. Rosner B., 2010, FUNDAMENTALS BIOSTAT
  30. Silva NSL, 2009, BRAZ J SPORTS MED, V15, P219
  31. Soares EG, 2013, REV CPAQV, V5, P1

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/Outros