Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorJanicijevic, Danica
dc.contributor.authorMiras Moreno, Sergio 
dc.contributor.authorMorenas Aguilar, María Dolores
dc.contributor.authorBaena Raya, Andrés
dc.contributor.authorWeakley, Jonathon
dc.contributor.authorGarcía Ramos, Amador 
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-19T11:39:46Z
dc.date.available2024-04-19T11:39:46Z
dc.date.issued2024-02-01
dc.identifier.citationJanicijevic, D., Miras-Moreno, S., Morenas-Aguilar, M.D., Baena-Raya, A., Weakley, J. and García-Ramos, A. (2024), Maximal and submaximal intended velocity squat sets: Do they selectively impact mechanical performance in paired multijoint upper-body exercise sets?. Eur J Sport Sci, 24: 200-209. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12078es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/90938
dc.description.abstractThis study aimed to investigate how squat protocols performed at maximal and submaximal intended velocities during interset periods of paired upper‐body exercises that impact the mechanical performance of these multijoint upper‐body exercises. Twenty‐one young and healthy adults (seven women) completed three experimental sessions, each comprising four sets of five repetitions at 75% of their 1‐repetition maximum, with a 4‐min break between sets using the bench press and bench pull exercises. The experimental sessions differed in the protocol utilized during the interset periods: (i) Passive—no physical exercise was performed; (ii) SQfast—5 repetitions of the squat exercise at maximal intended velocity against the load associated with a mean velocity (MV) of 0.75 m s−1; and (iii) SQslow—5 repetitions of the squat exercise at submaximal velocity (intended MV of 0.50 m s−1) against the load associated with an MV of 0.75 m s−1. Level of significance was p ≤ 0.05. The main findings revealed negligible differences (effect size [ES] < 0.20) among the exercise protocols (passive vs. SQfast vs. SQslow) for all mechanical variables during the bench pull, whereas during the bench press, small differences (ES from 0.23 to 0.31) emerged favoring the passive protocol over SQfast and SQslow in terms of mean set velocity and fastest MV of the set. The absence of significant differences between the SQfast and SQslow protocols, irrespective of the particular upper‐body exercise, implies that the intended lifting velocity does not influence the potential interference effect during paired set training procedures.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Natural Science Foundation of China under grant 12250410237es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipFunding for open access charge: Universidad de Granada/CBUAes_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sonses_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectFatigue es_ES
dc.subjectResistance traininges_ES
dc.subjectSupersetes_ES
dc.titleMaximal and submaximal intended velocity squat sets: Do they selectively impact mechanical performance in paired multijoint upper‐body exercise sets?es_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ejsc.12078
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional