Data_Sheet_1_A Plyometric Warm-Up Protocol Improves Running Economy in Recreational Endurance Athletes.zip
This study explored the impact of two differing warm-up protocols (involving either resistance exercises or plyometric exercises) on running economy (RE) in healthy recreationally active participants. Twelve healthy university students [three males, nine females, age 20 ± 2 years, maximal oxygen uptake (38.4 ± 6.4 ml min–1 kg–1)] who performed less than 5 h per week of endurance exercise volunteered to participant in this study. All participants completed three different warm-up protocols (control, plyometric, and resistance warm-up) in a counterbalanced crossover design with trials separated by 48 h, using a Latin-square arrangement. Dependent variables measured in this study were RE at four running velocities (7, 8, 9, and 10 km h–1), maximal oxygen uptake; heart rate; respiratory exchange rate; expired ventilation; perceived race readiness; rating of perceived exertion, time to exhaustion and leg stiffness. The primary finding of this study was that the plyometric warm-up improved RE compared to the control warm-up (6.2% at 7 km h–1, ES = 0.355, 9.1% at 8 km h–1, ES = 0.513, 4.5% at 9 km h–1, ES = 0.346, and 4.4% at 10 km h–1, ES = 0.463). There was no statistically significant difference in VO2 between control and resistance warm-up conditions at any velocity. There were also no statistically significant differences between conditions in other metabolic and pulmonary gas exchange variables; time to exhaustion; perceived race readiness and maximal oxygen uptake. However, leg stiffness increased by 20% (P = 0.039, ES = 0.90) following the plyometric warm-up and was correlated with the improved RE at a velocity of 8 km h–1 (r = 0.475, P = 0.041). No significant differences in RE were found between the control and resistance warm-up protocols. In comparison with the control warm-up protocol, an acute plyometric warm-up protocol can improve RE in healthy adults.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.2165/00007256-199622020-00003
- https://doi.org//10.1242/jeb.02340
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s004210050438
- https://doi.org//10.1519/JSC.0000000000001316
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jsams.2013.12.005
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s40279-014-0246-y
- https://doi.org//10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181def1f5
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jsams.2018.07.023
- https://doi.org//10.1519/JSC.0000000000002456
- https://doi.org//10.1016/0021-9290(89)90224-8
- https://doi.org//10.1080/17461391.2018.1438519
- https://doi.org//10.1139/apnm-2015-0238
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s004210050249
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s004210050330
- https://doi.org//10.1080/17461391.2017.1305454
- https://doi.org//10.1055/s-2008-1038792
- https://doi.org//10.1152/jappl.2000.88.6.2131
- https://doi.org//10.2165/00007256-200535070-00004
- https://doi.org//10.1123/ijspp.8.1.77
- https://doi.org//10.1080/026404196367796
- https://doi.org//10.1519/jsc.0000000000001705
- https://doi.org//10.1519/JSC.0b013e318280cc26
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s40279-016-0474-4
- https://doi.org//10.1123/jab.21.2.167
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00421-006-0147-3
- https://doi.org//10.1590/s0100-879x2000000500003
- https://doi.org//10.1519/00124278-200008000-00009
- https://doi.org//10.1519/r-18235.1
- https://doi.org//10.1055/s-0042-112592
- https://doi.org//10.2165/00007256-198502020-00002
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00421-002-0741-y
- https://doi.org//10.1519/00124278-200302000-00010