Cargando…
Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community
Coaches and athletes in elite sports are constantly seeking to use innovative and advanced training strategies to efficiently improve strength/power performance in already highly-trained individuals. In this regard, high-intensity conditioning contractions have become a popular means to induce acute...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441077/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32495254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0 |
_version_ | 1783573238685630464 |
---|---|
author | Prieske, Olaf Behrens, Martin Chaabene, Helmi Granacher, Urs Maffiuletti, Nicola A. |
author_facet | Prieske, Olaf Behrens, Martin Chaabene, Helmi Granacher, Urs Maffiuletti, Nicola A. |
author_sort | Prieske, Olaf |
collection | PubMed |
description | Coaches and athletes in elite sports are constantly seeking to use innovative and advanced training strategies to efficiently improve strength/power performance in already highly-trained individuals. In this regard, high-intensity conditioning contractions have become a popular means to induce acute improvements primarily in muscle contractile properties, which are supposed to translate to subsequent power performances. This performance-enhancing physiological mechanism has previously been called postactivation potentiation (PAP). However, in contrast to the traditional mechanistic understanding of PAP that is based on electrically-evoked twitch properties, an increasing number of studies used the term PAP while referring to acute performance enhancements, even if physiological measures of PAP were not directly assessed. In this current opinion article, we compare the two main approaches (i.e., mechanistic vs. performance) used in the literature to describe PAP effects. We additionally discuss potential misconceptions in the general use of the term PAP. Studies showed that mechanistic and performance-related PAP approaches have different characteristics in terms of the applied research field (basic vs. applied), effective conditioning contractions (e.g., stimulated vs. voluntary), verification (lab-based vs. field tests), effects (twitch peak force vs. maximal voluntary strength), occurrence (consistent vs. inconsistent), and time course (largest effect immediately after vs. ~ 7 min after the conditioning contraction). Moreover, cross-sectional studies revealed inconsistent and trivial-to-large-sized associations between selected measures of mechanistic (e.g., twitch peak force) vs. performance-related PAP approaches (e.g., jump height). In an attempt to avoid misconceptions related to the two different PAP approaches, we propose to use two different terms. Postactivation potentiation should only be used to indicate the increase in muscular force/torque production during an electrically-evoked twitch. In contrast, postactivation performance enhancement (PAPE) should be used to refer to the enhancement of measures of maximal strength, power, and speed following conditioning contractions. The implementation of this terminology would help to better differentiate between mechanistic and performance-related PAP approaches. This is important from a physiological point of view, but also when it comes to aggregating findings from PAP studies, e.g., in the form of meta-analyses, and translating these findings to the field of strength and conditioning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7441077 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74410772020-08-27 Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community Prieske, Olaf Behrens, Martin Chaabene, Helmi Granacher, Urs Maffiuletti, Nicola A. Sports Med Current Opinion Coaches and athletes in elite sports are constantly seeking to use innovative and advanced training strategies to efficiently improve strength/power performance in already highly-trained individuals. In this regard, high-intensity conditioning contractions have become a popular means to induce acute improvements primarily in muscle contractile properties, which are supposed to translate to subsequent power performances. This performance-enhancing physiological mechanism has previously been called postactivation potentiation (PAP). However, in contrast to the traditional mechanistic understanding of PAP that is based on electrically-evoked twitch properties, an increasing number of studies used the term PAP while referring to acute performance enhancements, even if physiological measures of PAP were not directly assessed. In this current opinion article, we compare the two main approaches (i.e., mechanistic vs. performance) used in the literature to describe PAP effects. We additionally discuss potential misconceptions in the general use of the term PAP. Studies showed that mechanistic and performance-related PAP approaches have different characteristics in terms of the applied research field (basic vs. applied), effective conditioning contractions (e.g., stimulated vs. voluntary), verification (lab-based vs. field tests), effects (twitch peak force vs. maximal voluntary strength), occurrence (consistent vs. inconsistent), and time course (largest effect immediately after vs. ~ 7 min after the conditioning contraction). Moreover, cross-sectional studies revealed inconsistent and trivial-to-large-sized associations between selected measures of mechanistic (e.g., twitch peak force) vs. performance-related PAP approaches (e.g., jump height). In an attempt to avoid misconceptions related to the two different PAP approaches, we propose to use two different terms. Postactivation potentiation should only be used to indicate the increase in muscular force/torque production during an electrically-evoked twitch. In contrast, postactivation performance enhancement (PAPE) should be used to refer to the enhancement of measures of maximal strength, power, and speed following conditioning contractions. The implementation of this terminology would help to better differentiate between mechanistic and performance-related PAP approaches. This is important from a physiological point of view, but also when it comes to aggregating findings from PAP studies, e.g., in the form of meta-analyses, and translating these findings to the field of strength and conditioning. Springer International Publishing 2020-06-03 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7441077/ /pubmed/32495254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Current Opinion Prieske, Olaf Behrens, Martin Chaabene, Helmi Granacher, Urs Maffiuletti, Nicola A. Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title | Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title_full | Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title_fullStr | Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title_full_unstemmed | Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title_short | Time to Differentiate Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning Community |
title_sort | time to differentiate postactivation “potentiation” from “performance enhancement” in the strength and conditioning community |
topic | Current Opinion |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441077/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32495254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT prieskeolaf timetodifferentiatepostactivationpotentiationfromperformanceenhancementinthestrengthandconditioningcommunity AT behrensmartin timetodifferentiatepostactivationpotentiationfromperformanceenhancementinthestrengthandconditioningcommunity AT chaabenehelmi timetodifferentiatepostactivationpotentiationfromperformanceenhancementinthestrengthandconditioningcommunity AT granacherurs timetodifferentiatepostactivationpotentiationfromperformanceenhancementinthestrengthandconditioningcommunity AT maffiulettinicolaa timetodifferentiatepostactivationpotentiationfromperformanceenhancementinthestrengthandconditioningcommunity |