Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for :

  • Author: Ian Jones x
  • Physical Education and Coaching x
  • International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Compression Garments: No Enhancement of High-Intensity Exercise in Hot Radiant Conditions

Martin J. Barwood, Jo Corbett, John Feeney, Paul Hannaford, Dan Henderson, Ian Jones, and Jade Kirke

Purpose:

To establish the thermal and performance effects of wearing a lower-body graduated compression garment (GCG) in a hot environment (35.2°C ± 0.1°C) with a representative radiant heat load (~800 W/m2) in contrast to a control (running shorts) and sham condition (a compression garment 1 size larger than that recommended by the manufacturer), with the latter included to establish any placebo effect.

Method:

Eight participants (mean ± SD; age 21 ± 2 y, height 1.77 ± 0.06 m, mass 72.8 ± 7.1 kg, surface area, 1.89 ± 0.10 m2) completed 3 treadmill tests at a fixed speed for 15 min followed by a self-paced 5-km time trial. Performance (completion time) and pacing (split time), thermal responses (aural, skin, and mean body temperature, cardiac frequency), and perceptual responses (rating of perceived exertion [RPE], thermal sensation, thermal comfort) were measured.

Results:

Performance in the compression group was not different than in either sham or control at any stage (P > .05); completion time 26.08 ± 4.08, 26.05 ± 3.27, and 25.18 ± 3.15 min, respectively. At the end of the 5-km time trial, RPE was not different; it was 19 ± 1 across conditions. In general, thermal and perceptual responses were not different, although the radiant heat load increased site-specific skin temperature (quadriceps) in the garment conditions.

Conclusion:

GCG did not enhance performance in a hot environment with a representative radiant heat load. The sham treatment did not benefit perception. GCG provided no evidence of performance enhancement.

Restricted access

Signaling Responses After Varying Sequencing of Strength and Endurance Training in a Fed State

Thomas W. Jones, Ian H. Walshe, David L. Hamilton, Glyn Howatson, Mark Russell, Oliver J. Price, Alan St Clair Gibson, and Duncan N. French

Purpose:

To compare anabolic signaling responses to differing sequences of concurrent strength and endurance training in a fed state.

Methods:

Eighteen resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to the following experimental conditions: strength training (ST), strength followed by endurance training (ST-END), or endurance followed by strength training (END-ST). Muscle tissue samples were taken from the vastus lateralis before each exercise protocol, on cessation of exercise, and 1 h after cessation of strength training. Tissue was analyzed for total and phosphorylated (p-) signaling proteins linked to the mTOR and AMPK networks.

Results:

Strength-training performance was similar between ST, ST-END, and END-ST. p-S6k1 was elevated from baseline 1 h posttraining in ST and ST-END (both P < .05). p-4E-BP1 was significantly lower than baseline post-ST (P = .01), whereas at 1 h postexercise in the ST-END condition p-4E-BP1 was significantly greater than postexercise (P = .04). p-ACC was elevated from baseline both postexercise and 1 h postexercise (both P < .05) in the END-ST condition. AMPK, mTOR, p38, PKB, and eEF2 responded similarly to ST, ST-END, and END-ST. Signaling responses to ST, ST-END, and END were largely similar. As such it cannot be ascertained which sequence of concurrent strength and endurance training is most favorable in promoting anabolic signaling.

Conclusions:

In the case of the current study an acute bout of concurrent training of differing sequences elicited similar responses of the AMPK and mTOR networks.

Restricted access

Countermovement Jump and Isometric Strength Test–Retest Reliability in English Premier League Academy Football Players

Matthew Springham, Nav Singh, Perry Stewart, Jordan Matthews, Ian Jones, Charlie Norton-Sherwood, Dominic May, Jamie Salter, Anthony J. Strudwick, and Joseph W. Shaw

Purpose: To examine the test–retest reliability of countermovement jump (CMJ) and isometric strength testing measures in elite-level under-18 and under-23 academy football players. Methods: A total of 36 players performed 3 maximal CMJs and isometric abductor (IABS), adductor (IADS), and posterior chain (IPCS) strength tests on 2 separate test days using dual force plates (CMJ and IPCS) and a portable strength testing device (IABS and IADS). Relative (intraclass correlation coefficient) and absolute (coefficient of variation, standard error of the measurement, and minimal detectable change [MDC%]) reliabilities for 34 CMJ, 10 IABS, 10 IADS, and 11 IPCS measures were analyzed using between-sessions best, mean, and within-session methods. Results: For all methods, relative reliability was good to excellent for all CMJ and all IADS measures and poor to good for all IABS and IPCS measures. Absolute reliability was good (ie, coefficient of variation < 10%) for 27 (best) and 28 (mean) CMJ variables and for 6 (IABS and IADS) and 2 (IPCS) isometric measures. Commonly used CMJ measures (jump height, eccentric duration, and flight-time:contraction-time ratio) had good to excellent relative reliability and an MDC% range of 14.6% to 23.7%. Likewise, commonly used isometric peak force measures for IABS, IADS, and IPCS had good to excellent relative reliability and an MDC% range of 22.2% to 26.4%. Conclusions: Commonly used CMJ and isometric strength measures had good test–retest reliability but might be limited by their MDC%. Rate-of-force-development measures (for all isometric tests) and impulse measures (IPCS) are limited by poor relative and absolute reliability and high MDC%. MDC% statistics should be considered in the context of typical responsiveness.