Edited by Carl Foster, Stephen Seiler, Aaron Coutts, Shona Halson, Franco Impellizzeri, Jos de Koning, Renate M. Leithäuser, Michael McGuigan, Iñigo Mujika, David Pyne, and Ralph Beneke
Carl Foster, Daniel Boullosa, Michael McGuigan, Andrea Fusco, Cristina Cortis, Blaine E. Arney, Bo Orton, Christopher Dodge, Salvador Jaime, Kim Radtke, Teun van Erp, Jos J. de Koning, Daniel Bok, Jose A. Rodriguez-Marroyo, and John P. Porcari
The session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) method was developed 25 years ago as a modification of the Borg concept of rating of perceived exertion (RPE), designed to estimate the intensity of an entire training session. It appears to be well accepted as a marker of the internal training load. Early studies demonstrated that sRPE correlated well with objective measures of internal training load, such as the percentage of heart rate reserve and blood lactate concentration. It has been shown to be useful in a wide variety of exercise activities ranging from aerobic to resistance to games. It has also been shown to be useful in populations ranging from patients to elite athletes. The sRPE is a reasonable measure of the average RPE acquired across an exercise session. Originally designed to be acquired ∼30 minutes after a training bout to prevent the terminal elements of an exercise session from unduly influencing the rating, sRPE has been shown to be temporally robust across periods ranging from 1 minute to 14 days following an exercise session. Within the training impulse concept, sRPE, or other indices derived from sRPE, has been shown to be able to account for both positive and negative training outcomes and has contributed to our understanding of how training is periodized to optimize training outcomes and to understand maladaptations such as overtraining syndrome. The sRPE as a method of monitoring training has the advantage of extreme simplicity. While it is not ideal for the precise recording of the details of the external training load, it has large advantages relative to evaluating the internal training load.
William J. Kraemer, Ana L. Gómez, Nicholas A. Ratamess, Jay R. Hoffman, Jeff S. Volek, Martyn R. Rubin, Timothy P. Scheett, Michael R. McGuigan, Duncan French, Jaci L. VanHeest, Robbin B. Wickham, Brandon Doan, Scott A. Mazzetti, Robert U. Newton, and Carl M. Maresh
To determine the effects of Vicoprofen®, ibuprofen, and placebo on anaerobic performance and pain relief after resistance-exercise-induced muscle damage.
Randomized, controlled clinical study.
University human-performance/sports-medicine laboratory.
36 healthy men.
Methods and Measures:
After baseline testing (72 h), participants performed an eccentric-exercise protocol. Each was evaluated for pain 24 h later and randomly assigned to a Vicoprofen (VIC), ibuprofen (IBU), or placebo (P) group. Postexercise testing was performed every 24 h for 4 d.
Significantly greater muscle force, power, and total work were observed in VIC than in P (P < .05) for most time points and for IBU at 48 h.
Anaerobic performance is enhanced with VIC, especially within the first 24 h after significant muscle-tissue damage. The greater performances observed at 48 h might be a result of less damage at this time point with VIC treatment.