Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35980952›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

Swimming performance, physiology, and post-activation performance enhancement following dryland transition phase warmup: A systematic review.

Max R McKenzie, Mark R McKean, Danielle P Doyle, Luke W Hogarth, Brendan J Burkett

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Max R McKenzieQueensland Academy of Sport, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7417-4463
Mark R McKeanQueensland Academy of Sport, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7024-9181
Danielle P DoyleQueensland Academy of Sport, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Luke W HogarthSchool of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia.
Brendan J BurkettSchool of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia.
University of the Sunshine Coast · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn swimming, the period between the end of the swimming warmup and the beginning of competition is critical to performance, here termed the transition phase. Several options are available during this phase, necessitating a systematic review to understand if optimal strategies exist.

objectivesTo synthesise and critically evaluate the current literature investigating land-based warmup interventions on subsequent performance in competitive swimmers.

methodsA search of three electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCO SPORTDiscus and Web of Science) was conducted to identify original studies until February 2022. Selection criteria dictated that (i) a control condition was used, (ii) participants were ≥ 15 years of age, (iii) a pool-based warmup was done prior to the land-based warmup. A total of 25 articles met the selection criteria.

resultsReducing the transition phase duration by at least half led to consistently faster time-trial times of between 1.1-1.5% for all included studies. Passive warmups using clothing interventions resulted in mostly faster time-trial's of 0.4-0.8% with increases in skin temperature frequent, though little change occurred in core temperature. The methodology of passive respiratory warmups were vastly different with positive time-trial's effects ranging between 0.9-1.1% for two studies, though one reported no meaningful difference. Active warmups led to consistently faster time-trial's between 0.7-0.9%, though the unpinning factors are not clear. Warmups which combined passive and active options frequently led to faster time-trial's between 0.8-3%. Upper and combined limb post-activation performance enhancement led to mostly unfavourable time-trial changes. Lower limb exclusive protocols results were inconsistent, with limited beneficial effects on time-trial or start performance reported following plyometric protocols. However, there does appear merit in heavier loaded lower limb protocols.

conclusionEach of a reduced transition phase length, and passive, active or combination warmup have demonstrated improvements in swimming performance. Conversely, PAPE protocols should be used with caution, especially when including the upper limbs.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceWarm-Up ExerciseHumansSkin TemperatureSwimmingTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID35980952
PMCPMC9387820
OpenAlexW4292680993

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.