Temporal response of post-activation performance enhancement induced by a plyometric conditioning activity
增强式调节活动引起的激活后性能增强的时间反应

Abstract 抽象的

1. Introduction 一、简介

Post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) is an acute improvement in voluntary muscular performance (strength production) as a result of a previous voluntary conditioning activity (CA) (1, 2). PAPE is one of the main objectives of a warm-up, and its phenomenon may be explained by phosphorylation of myosin regulatory light chains (at least in the earliest stages), fluid shifts into the working muscles, and increased muscle activation (2). Traditional high- or moderate-intensity strength exercises are frequently used to induce PAPE (3). Furthermore, PAPE has been reported post plyometric exercises (3), which involve the stretch-shortening cycle to store energy and produce more powerful movement (4, 5). Plyometric exercises use different types of jumps (bilateral, unilateral, bounds, hops, and drop jumps) (4, 5) and do not depend on equipment and implements, demonstrating a practical advantage compared to traditional high- or moderate-intensity CA.
激活后性能增强 (PAPE) 是由于之前的自愿调节活动 (CA) 而导致的自愿肌肉性能（力量产生）的急剧改善 ( 1 , 2 )。 PAPE 是热身的主要目标之一，其现象可以通过肌球蛋白调节轻链的磷酸化（至少在最早阶段）、液体转移到工作肌肉以及肌肉激活增加来解释 ( 2 )。传统的高强度或中等强度的力量练习经常用于诱发 PAPE ( 3 )。此外，据报道，PAPE 是在增强式训练后进行的 ( 3 )，其中涉及拉伸-缩短周期来储存能量并产生更强大的运动 ( 4 , 5 )。增强式训练使用不同类型的跳跃（双边、单边、弹跳、单跳和跳跳）( 4 , 5 )，并且不依赖于设备和工具，与传统的高或中等强度 CA 相比具有实际优势。

It was suggested that the rest period after CA influences the magnitude of PAPE (3, 6). Apparently, fatigue and potentiation coexist after a CA (7), and PAPE is reported only if the potentiation is greater than the fatigue (3). Therefore, based on two meta-analyses (3, 6), Bullosa (1) suggested that greater PAPE is found 5–10 min after the CA. However, PAPE may be influenced by the type of CA, and improvement in voluntary muscular performance may be reported 0.3–4 min after a plyometric CA (3). For example, improvement in countermovement jump (CMJ) performance was reported 1–5 min after multiple sets of plyometric CA performed by professional rugby union players (8). However, the reported study investigated the PAPE effect up to 5 min after the plyometric CA and no effect >5 min was shown (8). In male collegiate soccer players, for example, an improvement in CMJ was reported 10 min after a plyometric CA (9). Another study investigated the PAPE effect 7 and 15 min after top-level sprinters executed drop-jumps and did not find positive effects (10). The inconsistency of the results reported (8–10) and the limited number of studies investigating the PAPE effect after a plyometric CA (3) contribute to the difficulty in understanding the temporal response of PAPE after this CA, making new investigations necessary.
有人提出，CA 后的休息时间会影响 PAPE 的程度 ( 3 , 6 )。显然，CA（ 7 ）后疲劳和增强共存，只有当增强大于疲劳（ 3 ）时才会报告 PAPE。因此，根据两项荟萃分析 ( 3 , 6 )，Bullosa ( 1 ) 表明，CA 后 5-10 分钟发现更大的 PAPE。然而，PAPE 可能会受到 CA 类型的影响，并且在增强式 CA 后 0.3-4 分钟可能会报告自愿肌肉表现的改善 ( 3 )。例如，据报道，职业橄榄球联盟运动员在进行多组增强式 CA 训练后 1-5 分钟，反向运动跳跃 (CMJ) 表现有所改善 ( 8 )。然而，报告的研究调查了增强式 CA 后 5 分钟内 PAPE 的效果，并且没有显示 > 5 分钟的效果 ( 8 )。例如，据报道，男子大学足球运动员在进行增强式 CA 训练 10 分钟后 CMJ 有所改善 ( 9 )。另一项研究调查了顶级短跑运动员执行跳伞后 7 分钟和 15 分钟的 PAPE 效果，但没有发现积极效果 ( 10 )。报告结果的不一致 ( 8 – 10 ) 以及调查增强式 CA 后 PAPE 效应的研究数量有限 ( 3 )，导致难以理解 CA 后 PAPE 的时间反应，因此有必要进行新的研究。

To better understand the PAPE effect promoted by a plyometric CA, the aim of this study was to investigate the temporal response (up to 9 min) of PAPE after a plyometric CA. This investigation will help coaches and practitioners to manage the time of rest between the plyometric CA and subsequent exercise. The hypothesis raised was that a plyometric CA could promote PAPE and an effect would be shown up to 9 min after CA.

2. Materials and methods

This is a randomized controlled clinical trial with a crossover design. To verify the temporal response of PAPE induced by a plyometric CA, participants performed a CMJ test pre and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 9 min post multiple sets of plyometric exercises (plyometric CA) or control, performed seven days apart. The CMJ was selected as the performance test because it is a simple, practical, reliable, and validated field test to estimate power of the lower limbs (11) and a sensitive test to monitor neuromuscular status (12). Furthermore, the jump height performed is associated with the ability to generate yank (the first time derivative of force) (13).

2.2. Procedures

2.2.1. Design

The participants visited the laboratory 3 times, 7 days apart, at the same time of the day (8 and 10 a.m.). On the first day, the inclusion criteria were checked, and the participants signed the consent form. They were then characterized through the variables age, weight, and height, and performed the familiarization with the test and plyometric CA. The familiarization consisted of a warm-up with 5 min running/walking with a perceived exertion ∼3 (Scale 0–10) (14), followed by 5 min of rest, 3 submaximal CMJ, and 5 maximal CMJ. The 5 maximal CMJs were used to analyze the reliability of the test. Subsequently, the plyometric CA (3 × 5 rep with 1 min of rest of CMJ, scissor jump, and horizontal jump = totalizing 45 jumps) was performed. In the second and third visits the participants performed the plyometric CA or the control in a cross-over design. Therefore, on the second day, 7 participants performed the plyometric CA and the other 7 performed the control, with inversion of procedures performed on the third day. The order of procedures was randomized using a code and an excel spreadsheet. The plyometric CA consisted of 2 × 5 rep of CMJ, scissor jump (2 × 5 rep for each leg), and horizontal jump with a 1 min rest between sets and exercises (totalizing 30 jumps). The control condition consisted of participants remaining seated on a chair for 6 min and 30 s (close to time spent performing the plyometric CA). The CMJ test was performed before (pre) and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 9 min post the plyometric CA or control. After both conditions and between the CMJ tests at post (1-, 3-, 6-, and 9 min), participants remained at rest in an orthostatic position. All procedures are shown in Figure 1.

Open in a separate window

Figure 1 图1

Study design. Plyometric conditioning activity, RPE = rating of perceived exertion, CMJ = countermovement jump.
学习设计。增强式调节活动，RPE = 感知用力等级，CMJ = 反向运动跳跃。

2.2.2. Countermovement jump test

The CMJ test was performed using the optical device New Fit Jump System (Cefise ®, São Paulo, BR), which was developed to measure ground contact time and flight time in vertical jumps. For the CMJ test, the participant started from the orthostatic position, performed a squat with a stretch-shortening cycle and immediately performed a jump. The participants were instructed to perform a maximum vertical jump and received feedback on each jump performed. Furthermore, they received motivational guidance through the following verbal stimulation: you can jump high (or you can jump higher), concentrate, prepare, go. The motivational guidance was standardized to reduce the chance of bias (15). Three CMJs were performed with arms akimbo, respecting a 15 s interval between them, during which the participants remained at rest in an orthostatic position. The average jump height of the 3 jumps was determined as the performance variable. The five CMJs performed during the familiarization were used for the reliability analysis via intraclass coefficient correlation calculation (single measure ICC = 0.95 [CI95% = 0.90–0.98], average measure ICC = 0.99 [CI95% = 0.98–1.00].

2.2.2.反动跳跃测试

CMJ 测试是使用光学设备 New Fit Jump System（Cefise ®，圣保罗，巴西）进行的，该系统是为测量垂直跳跃中的触地时间和飞行时间而开发的。对于 CMJ 测试，参与者从直立位置开始，进行拉伸-缩短循环的深蹲，然后立即进行跳跃。参与者被指示进行最大垂直跳跃并收到每次跳跃的反馈。此外，他们还通过以下言语刺激获得了激励指导：你可以跳高（或者你可以跳得更高）、集中注意力、准备、出发。动机指导被标准化以减少偏见的可能性（15）。进行 3 次 CMJ 时，双手叉腰，间隔 15 秒，在此期间，参与者保持直立姿势休息。将3次跳跃的平均跳跃高度确定为性能变量。在熟悉期间进行的五个 CMJ 通过组内系数相关性计算进行可靠性分析（单项测量 ICC = 0.95 [CI95% = 0.90–0.98]，平均测量 ICC = 0.99 [CI95% = 0.98–1.00]。

3. Results 3. 结果

A description of the age, weight, height, and body mass index (BMI) of the participants is reported in Table 1.
表 1描述了参与者的年龄、体重、身高和体重指数 (BMI)。

The CMJ results at different moments from when control or plyometric CA were performed, and the mean difference between each moment and pre values are described in Table 2.
进行对照或增强式 CA 时不同时刻的 CMJ 结果，每个时刻与预值之间的平均差异如表 2所示。

Time (F = 11.91; ղ_p² = 0.48; P < 0.01), condition (F = 17.79; ղ_p² = 0.58; P < 0.01), and interaction (F = 12.61; ղ_p² = 0.49; P < 0.01) effects were found for CMJ comparisons. When control was performed, the CMJ increased at 3 min compared with pre (P = 0.03). Furthermore, the CMJ was higher at 3 min compared to 1 min (P = 0.03). No other time differences were reported for the control condition. When plyometric CA was performed, the CMJ increased at 1 min (P < 0.01), 3 min (P < 0.01), and 6 min (P = 0.02) but was not different at 9 min (P = 0.11) compared to pre. Furthermore, the CMJ was higher at 1 min compared to 6 min (P = 0.02) and 9 min (P = 0.02). No other time differences were reported for plyometric CA. For the condition comparisons, CMJ were not different at pre (P = 0.80), but was different at 1 min (P < 0.01), 3 min (P < 0.01), 6 min (P < 0.01), and 9 min (P = 0.02) (Figure 2). The ES (Cohen's d) and ES magnitudes are reported in Table 2. The ES magnitude of the comparisons of all moments compared to pre was null (d < 0.20) for control and small (d < 0.50) for plyometric CA.
时间 (F = 11.91; ?? _p ² = 0.48; P < 0.01)、条件 (F = 17.79; ?? _p ² = 0.58; P < 0.01) 和交互作用 (F = 12.61; ?? _p ² = 0.49; P < 0.01 ）在 CMJ 比较中发现了影响。当进行对照时，与之前相比，CMJ 在 3 分钟时增加（ P = 0.03）。此外，3 分钟时的 CMJ 高于 1 分钟（ P = 0.03）。没有报告对照条件的其他时间差异。当进行增强式CA时，与训练前相比，CMJ在1分钟（ P <0.01）、3分钟（ P <0.01）和6分钟（ P =0.02）时增加，但在9分钟（ P =0.11）时没有差异。此外，1 分钟时的 CMJ 高于 6 分钟 ( P = 0.02) 和 9 分钟 ( P = 0.02)。没有报告增强式 CA 的其他时间差异。对于条件比较，CMJ 在术前没有差异 ( P = 0.80)，但在 1 分钟 ( P < 0.01)、3 分钟 ( P < 0.01)、6 分钟 ( P < 0.01) 和 9 分钟 ( P = 0.02）（图2 ）。 ES（Cohen's d）和 ES 震级报告于表 2中。所有时刻与预前比较的 ES 幅度对于对照来说为零 (d < 0.20)，对于增强式 CA 来说较小 (d < 0.50)。

Open in a separate window

Figure 2 图2

Mean ± standard deviation of countermovement jump results at pre and up to 9 min post control (white circles) and plyometric conditioning activity (black squares) interventions. #Difference from pre-value in control (##P < 0.05); *difference from pre-value in plyometric (*P < 0.01; **P < 0.05); Ψ difference from 1 min in control (ΨΨ P < 0.05). ♦ difference from 1 min in plyometric (♦♦ P Description of of age, weight, height, and body mass 0.05). Φ difference between conditions (Φ P < 0.01; ΦΦ P < 0.05).
控制（白色圆圈）和增强式调节活动（黑色方块）干预前和后 9 分钟的反向运动跳跃结果的平均值±标准差。 #与控制前值的差异(## P < 0.05); *与增强式训练前值的差异（* P < 0.01；** P < 0.05）；与对照 1 分钟的 Ψ 差异 (ΨΨ P < 0.05)。 ❖ 增强式训练与 1 分钟的差异（❖ P年龄、体重、身高和体重的描述 0.05）。条件之间的 Φ 差异（Φ P < 0.01；ΦΦ P < 0.05）。

The power values (1—β) of CMJ comparisons were 1.00 for time (f = 0.96), 1.00 for condition (f = 1.18), and 1.00 for interaction (f = 0.98).
CMJ 比较的功效值 (1- β ) 为时间 1.00 (f = 0.96)、条件 1.00 (f = 1.18) 和交互作用 1.00 (f = 0.98)。

4. Discussion 4. 讨论

The main finding of the present study was that CMJ increased post the plyometric CA. The difference between the conditions at 1–9 min post interventions, in addition to the small ES reported for comparisons between post (1–9 min) and pre moments for plyometric CA led us to accept the hypothesis raised, showing that plyometric CA promoted PAPE effects up to 9-min after the CA.
本研究的主要发现是增强式 CA 后 CMJ 增加。干预后 1-9 分钟条件之间的差异，以及增强式 CA 后（1-9 分钟）和前时刻之间的比较报告的小 ES 使我们接受所提出的假设，表明增强式 CA 促进 PAPE CA 后 9 分钟内生效。

In the present study, multiple sets of a plyometric CA (2 × 5 repetitions of 3 exercises, totalizing 30 jumps) increased the CMJ performance at 1-, 3-, and 6 min post CA. The use of multiple sets of a CA has been suggested previously (6), since it induces a larger PAPE effect than a single set of CA (3, 6). The result found is in accordance with results reported by Tobin and Delahunt (8), showing a PAPE effect 1-, 3-, and 5 min after multiple sets of a plyometric CA. The time response of PAPE after the plyometric CA reported was different to traditional high- and moderate-intensity CA, for which a PAPE effect was reported for >5 min of CA (1, 3, 6). A previous study with professional rugby players, for example, indicated increased performance in CMJ at 8- and 12 min post a preload stimulus of 3RM (repetition maximum) in the squat (17). One explanation for this divergent response was reported previously by Seitz and Haff (3), who suggested that a plyometric CA may produce less fatigue than a traditional high- or moderate-intensity CA, making it possible to observe an earlier PAPE effect. This suggestion is in accordance with the results shown by Sharma et al., (9), who reported a larger decrease in CMJ height 1 min post a heavy-resistance exercise than post a plyometric exercise. Although no mechanisms were analyzed to help explain the results found, the present study corroborates with the suggestion made by Seitz and Haff (3) that the PAPE effect may be reported earlier after a plyometric CA.
在本研究中，多组增强式 CA（2 × 5 次重复，共 3 次练习，总共 30 次跳跃）提高了 CA 后 1 分钟、3 分钟和 6 分钟的 CMJ 表现。先前已建议使用多组 CA ( 6 )，因为它比单组 CA 产生更大的 PAPE 效应 ( 3 , 6 )。发现的结果与 Tobin 和 Delahunt ( 8 ) 报告的结果一致，显示多组增强式 CA 后 1、3 和 5 分钟的 PAPE 效果。报告的增强式CA 后 PAPE 的时间响应与传统的高强度和中等强度 CA 不同，据报告 PAPE 效果持续 > 5分钟的 CA ( 1,3,6 )。例如，之前对职业橄榄球运动员的一项研究表明，在深蹲中接受 3RM（最大重复次数）的预负荷刺激后 8 分钟和 12 分钟的 CMJ 表现有所提高 ( 17 )。 Seitz 和 Haff 之前报道了对这种不同反应的一种解释 ( 3 )，他们认为增强式 CA 可能比传统的高强度或中等强度 CA 产生更少的疲劳，从而可以观察到更早的 PAPE 效应。这一建议与 Sharma 等人 ( 9 ) 所显示的结果一致，他们报告称，大阻力运动后 1 分钟 CMJ 高度的下降幅度比增强式训练后更大。虽然没有分析任何机制来帮助解释所发现的结果，但本研究证实了 Seitz 和 Haff ( 3 ) 提出的建议，即 PAPE 效应可能在增强式 CA 后更早报告。

Another important result found was the higher values of mean difference between CMJ height 1 min after plyometric CA and pre compared to mean differences between other moments (3-, 6-, 9 min) and pre. Although no significant differences (based on P value) were reported for comparisons between mean differences, the higher values of CMJ at 1 min after the plyometric CA reinforce the idea that the PAPE effect may be reported earlier after a plyometric CA (3). Higher values of CMJ at 1 min (compared to 3- and 5 min) were found by Tobin and Delahunt (8), suggesting that plyometric CA produces an immediate enhancement in CMJ performance. The preferential recruitment of type II motor units during plyometric exercises (3) and the increase in the compliant muscle-tendon unit (8, 18) are other mechanisms than the net balance between fatigue and potentiation speculated to explain the earlier PAPE effect promoted by a plyometric CA. This speculation should be confirmed in future studies.
发现的另一个重要结果是，与其他时刻（3、6、9 分钟）和训练前之间的平均差异相比，增强式 CA 后 1 分钟和训练前的 CMJ 高度之间的平均差异值更高。虽然平均差异之间的比较没有报告显着差异（基于P值），但增强式 CA 后 1 分钟的 CMJ 值较高，强化了这样的想法：PAPE 效应可能在增强式 CA 后更早报告（ 3 ）。 Tobin 和 Delahunt ( 8 ) 发现 1 分钟时（与 3 分钟和 5 分钟相比）CMJ 值更高，这表明增强式 CA 可以立即增强 CMJ 表现。在增强式训练过程中II型运动单位的优先募集( 3 )和顺应性肌肉肌腱单位的增加( 8 , 18 )是疲劳和增强之间的净平衡之外的其他机制，推测可以解释早期PAPE效应由增强式训练 CA。这一推测应该在未来的研究中得到证实。

In accordance with frequent reports in the literature, that a greater PAPE is found >5 min after the CA (1, 6), it was hypothesized that plyometric CA could increase CMJ performance for up to 9 min after this CA. However, based only on the P-value reported for the between moment comparisons, the results found do not allow us to accept this hypothesis. This is in line with a previous study reporting that a PAPE effect was not shown 7 and 15-min after drop-jumps performed by top-level sprinters (10). On the other hand, it is important to highlight the 1,87 cm mean difference between CMJ height 9 min after the plyometric CA compared to pre. PAPE effects were confirmed previously with a mean difference between jump heights of 1.53 cm after 5 min vs. pre (8). The clinical importance of this result is reinforced by the small ES reported for the comparisons between 9 min post and pre plyometric CA and by the significant difference between conditions (plyometric CA vs. control) reported at 9 min. Furthermore, an increase in CMJ 10 min after a plyometric CA was reported previously with collegiate soccer players (9). Therefore, further data analysis, not only based on the P-value, led us to accept the hypothesis raised that plyometric CA increased CMJ performance for up to 9 min after this CA. Other studies are suggested to confirm this interpretation.
根据文献中的频繁报道，CA 后 >5 分钟发现更大的 PAPE ( 1 , 6 )，假设增强式 CA 可以在该 CA 后最多 9 分钟内提高 CMJ 表现。然而，仅基于时刻比较报告的P值，发现的结果不允许我们接受这一假设。这与之前的一项研究报告一致，即顶级短跑运动员进行跳伞后 7 分钟和 15 分钟没有显示出 PAPE 效应 ( 10 )。另一方面，重要的是要强调增强式 CA 后 9 分钟的 CMJ 身高与之前相比，平均差异为 1.87 厘米。 PAPE 效果之前已得到证实，5 分钟后与之前相比，跳跃高度平均差异为 1.53 cm ( 8 )。增强式 CA 后 9 分钟与增强前 CA 之间的比较所报告的小 ES 以及 9 分钟时报告的条件（增强式 CA 与对照）之间的显着差异强化了该结果的临床重要性。此外，之前曾报道过大学足球运动员在进行增强式 CA 10 分钟后 CMJ 增加 ( 9 )。因此，进一步的数据分析（不仅基于P值）使我们接受了这样的假设：增强式 CA 在该 CA 后最多可提高 CMJ 表现长达 9 分钟。建议进行其他研究来证实这一解释。

A limitation of the present study is the non-probabilistic sampling by volunteering used in the present study. Furthermore, the sample included both males and females, which may have contributed to the large standard deviation shown, which could have influenced the lack of a significant difference at 9 min, for example. Sample stratification and equalization by sex could reduce this limitation. However, due to the difficulty of using probabilistic sampling, we decided to assume this limitation and conduct the study through non-probabilistic sampling and allowing the inclusion of participants of both sexes. Despite this limitation, the included sample was sufficient to demonstrate significant differences for time, condition, and interaction, and the results found are in line with previous reports (3, 8). Another point to highlight was the permanence of participants sitting in the control condition. This was proposed with the aim of submitting participants to a rest period. It is possible that remaining standing, a condition closer to the experimental procedure, would reduce the chance of any intervening variables. However, the close results found 1 min post-control compared to pre suggest that remaining seated did not interfere in the results found. Future studies should be performed aiming to reduce the reported limitations and reinvestigate PAPE responses after a plyometric CA.
本研究的局限性是本研究中使用的志愿服务的非概率抽样。此外，样本中同时包括男性和女性，这可能导致显示的标准偏差较大，例如，这可能会影响 9 分钟时缺乏显着差异。按性别进行样本分层和均等可以减少这种限制。然而，由于使用概率抽样的困难，我们决定假设这种限制，并通过非概率抽样并允许包括男女参与者来进行研究。尽管存在这一限制，所包含的样本足以证明时间、条件和相互作用的显着差异，并且发现的结果与之前的报告一致 ( 3 , 8 )。另一点需要强调的是参与者坐在控制条件下的持久性。提出这一点的目的是让参与者有一段休息时间。保持站立（一种更接近实验程序的条件）可能会减少任何干预变量的机会。然而，与控制前相比，控制后 1 分钟发现的接近结果表明，保持坐姿不会干扰所发现的结果。未来的研究应旨在减少所报告的局限性，并重新研究增强式 CA 后的 PAPE 反应。

The present study demonstrates that performing multiple sets of a plyometric CA improved subsequent performance in the CMJ. It is possible to conclude that multiple sets of a plyometric CA promote PAPE effects up to 9-min after the CA. The results found corroborate with the idea of an earlier PAPE effect promoted by a plyometric CA. Therefore, strength and conditioning coaches and practitioners may consider performing multiple sets of plyometric CA, especially using the protocol reported in the present study (2 × 5 rep with 1 min of rest between, of CMJ, scissor jump, and horizontal jump = totalizing 30 jumps) to produce immediate enhancement of power in the lower limbs.
本研究表明，进行多组增强式 CA 可以提高后续 CMJ 的表现。可以得出结论，多组增强式 CA 可在 CA 后长达 9 分钟内促进 PAPE 效果。结果证实了增强式 CA 促进早期 PAPE 效应的想法。因此，体能教练和练习者可以考虑进行多组增强式 CA，特别是使用本研究中报告的方案（2 × 5 次，中间休息 1 分钟，CMJ、剪刀跳和水平跳 = 总计 30跳跃）以立即增强下肢的力量。

Funding Statement 资金声明

The authors received financial support for the publication of the article from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – CAPES (PROGRAMA DE APOIO À PUBLICAÇÕES CIENTÍFICAS 2023 - UFBA).
作者获得了高等教育人员改进协调组织 - CAPES（2023 年科学出版物支持计划 - UFBA）对文章发表的财政支持。

References 参考