Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34826109›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Upper-Body Post-activation Performance Enhancement for Athletic Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis and Recommendations for Future Research.

Mitchell James Finlay, Craig Alan Bridge, Matt Greig, Richard Michael Page

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mitchell James FinlaySports Injuries Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, St. Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, Lancashire, UK. Finlaym@edgehill.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5572-2172
Craig Alan BridgeSports Injuries Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, St. Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, Lancashire, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9109-5185
Matt GreigSports Injuries Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, St. Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, Lancashire, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7315-6968
Richard Michael PageSports Injuries Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, St. Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, Lancashire, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2916-8822

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch on post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) is dominated by lower-body conditioning activities/performance test complexes. Despite the contribution of the upper body to many sporting actions, no review on upper-body PAPE currently exists.

objectivesThe aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to provide a synthesis of the available research on the inclusion of upper-body PAPE conditioning activities to improve athletic performance.

methodsA review of the literature was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines, including a literature search of EBSCOhost, SPORTDiscus, PubMed and Google Scholar databases. A total of 127 studies were identified through database searches, and were assessed against the following criteria: (1) randomised controlled trial or pre-and-post study design; (2) studies explored the effects of prior voluntary muscle activity, and not electrically induced contractions, (3) evidence, or lack thereof, of PAPE was quantified by the monitoring of individual performance to commonly applied physical tests or sport-specific tasks; (4) conditioning activities and performance tests were primarily upper-body; (5) detailed description of a standardised warm-up; and (6) full-text versions of studies could be accessed in English language peer-reviewed journals. Studies were quality assessed for methodological quality via the PEDro scale and ranked accordingly.

resultsThirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were classified into different conditioning activity modes: bench press variations, sport-specific (modified implement throws, swing-specific, cable pulley, elastic resistance, combination) and bodyweight activity. Acute performance enhancement in several movement-specific combinations was found. A meta-analysis revealed that bench press at  ≥ 80% one repetition maximum significantly (p = 0.03; ES = 0.31) improves subsequent power output in the ballistic bench throw at 30-40% one repetition maximum, following 8-12 min recovery. Additionally, sport-specific overweight implement throws improved subsequent throwing distance at competition weight by ~ 1.7-8.5%; ES = 0.14-0.33, following 3 min recovery. Sport-specific lighter weighted bat swings and swing-specific isometrics resulted in improved subsequent competition weight bat swing velocities, ranging from ~ 1.3-4.9%; ES = 0.16-0.57.

conclusionsThis review presents several upper-body movement-specific conditioning activities that could be considered by coaches and practitioners as part of complex or contrast training, or used in pre-competition warm-ups to acutely enhance performance.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceWarm-Up ExerciseExerciseExercise TherapyHumansMuscle, SkeletalRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34826109
PMCPMC8938350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.