ORIGINAL ARTICLE  EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2020 March;60(3):374-9

DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.20.10227-5

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Postactivation potentiation attenuates resistance exercise performance decrements following aerobic exercise in trained men

Marcelo CONRADO de FREITAS ^{1, 2} ✉, Valéria L. PANISSA ³, Jason M. CHOLEWA ⁴, Emerson FRANCHINI ³, Luís A. GOBBO ¹, Fabricio E. ROSSI ⁵

¹ Skeletal Muscle Assessment Laboratory (LABSIM), Department of Physical Education, School of Technology and Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Presidente Prudente, Brazil; ² Department of Nutrition, University of Western São Paulo (UNOESTE), Presidente Prudente, Brazil; ³ School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; ⁴ Department of Kinesiology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, South Carolina, SC, USA; ⁵ Immunometabolism of Skeletal Muscle and Exercise Research Group, Federal University of Piauí (UFPI), Teresina, Brazil

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate if a post-activation potentiation (PAP) protocol may attenuate the acute interference induced by high-intensity intermittent exercise (HIIE) and on subsequent strength exercise performance in recreationally trained men.
METHODS: Eleven resistance-trained men (age: 25.7±3.7 y) randomly completed three experimental trials: strength exercise (SE) only (4 sets of maximal number of repetitions at 70% on the 45º leg press); concurrent exercise (CE) comprised 5000-m of HIIE at maximal aerobic speed (1:1 effort and pause ratio) followed by SE protocol; CE with post-activation potentiation (CE-PAP), comprised the same CE protocol preceded by one set of 2 repetitions at 90% of 1RM on the 45° leg-press before strength exercise. The number of repetitions performed was recorded for each set and total weight lifted was calculated.
RESULTS: The CE condition induced a greater decrement in volume for the leg press compared to SE and CE-PAP in sets 1 (24±21%; 18±25%), 2 (20±21%; 22±22%), and 3 (19±20%; 25±15%), respectively. Total weight lifted was greater after SE (8,795±2,581 kg) and CE-PAP (8.809±2.655 kg) conditions compared to CE (7.049±2.822 kg) (SE vs. CE: P=0.020) and (CE-PAP vs. CE: P=0.010) but there was no significant difference between SE and CE-PAP (P=1.00).
CONCLUSIONS: PAP using a heavy load attenuated acute interference (total volume during lower-body strength) generated by HIIE protocol, but did not enhance volume compared to SE alone.

KEY WORDS: Resistance training; Exercise; Physical fitness