Forearm wearable resistance effects on sprint kinematics and kinetics

The influence of lightweight wearable resistance on whole body coordination during sprint acceleration among Australian Rules football players

Rapid acceleration is an important quality for field-based sport athletes. Technical factors contribute to acceleration and these can be deliberately influenced by coaches through implementation of constraints, which afford particular coordinative states or induce variability generally. Lightweight wearable resistance is an emerging training tool, which can act as a constraint on acceleration. At present, however, the effects on whole body coordination resulting from wearable resistance application are unknown. To better understand these effects, five male Australian Rules football athletes performed a series of 20 m sprints with either relatively light or heavy wearable resistance applied to the anterior or posterior aspects of the thighs or shanks. Whole body coordination during early acceleration was examined across eight wearable resistance conditions and compared with baseline (unresisted) acceleration coordination using group- and individual-level hierarchical cluster analysis. Self-organising maps and a joint-level distance matrix were used to further investigate specific kinematic changes in conditions where coordination differed most from baseline. Across the group, relatively heavy wearable resistance applied to the thighs resulted in the greatest difference to whole body coordination compared with baseline acceleration. On average, heavy posterior thigh wearable resistance led to altered pelvic position and greater hip extension, while heavy anterior thigh wearable resistance led to accentuated movement at the shoulders in the transverse and sagittal planes. These findings offer a useful starting point for coaches seeking to use wearable resistance to promote adoption of greater hip extension or upper body contribution during acceleration. Importantly, individuals varied in how they responded to heavy thigh wearable resistance, which coaches should be mindful of.

The use of wearable resistance and weighted vest for sprint performance and kinematics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wearable resistance (WR) and weighted vests (WV) can be used in almost all training conditions to enhance sprint performance; however, positioning and additional mass are different in WV and WR strategies, affecting performance and kinematics differently. We aimed to systematically review the literature, searching for intervention studies that reported the acute or chronic kinematic and performance impact of WV and WR and comparing them. We analyzed Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and SPORTDiscuss databases for longitudinal and cross-over studies investigating sprint performance or kinematics using an inverse-variance with a random-effect method for meta-analysis. After the eligibility assessment, 25 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Cross-over WR and WV studies found significantly higher sprint times and higher ground contact times (CT) compared to unloaded (UL) conditions. However, WR presented a lower step frequency (SF) compared to UL, whereas WV presented a lower step length (SL). Only one study investigated the chronic adaptations for WR, indicating a superiority of the WR group on sprint time compared to the control group. However, no difference was found chronically for WV regarding sprint time, CT, and flight time (FT). Our findings suggest that using WV and WR in field sports demonstrates overload sprint gesture through kinematic changes, however, WR can be more suitable for SF-reliant athletes and WV for SL-reliant athletes. Although promising for chronic performance improvement, coaches and athletes should carefully consider WV and WR use since there is no supporting evidence that WV or WR will impact sprint performance, CT, and FT.

Lower limbs micro-loading acutely attenuates repeated change-of-direction performance in male youth during small-sided soccer games

BACKGROUND

Soccer players often wear light-weighted wearable resistance (WR) attached to different body parts during the warm-up period with the aim to improve measures of physical fitness. However, the effect of WR on physical performance is unknown. This study evaluated the effects of WR with different micro-loadings on repeated change-of-direction (RCoD) performance while executing small-sided soccer games (SSG).

METHODS

Twenty male soccer players aged 16.0 ± 1.5 years (body mass 74.0 ± 7.4 kg, body-height 175.0 ± 10.0 cm) volunteered to participate in this study. Following a within-subject study design, players performed four specific warm-up protocols in randomized order with a rest of 72 h between protocols: (1) WR micro-loadings with 0.1% of body mass (WR0.1); (2) WR micro-loadings with 0.2% of body mass (WR0.2); (3) WR micro-loadings with 0.3% of body mass (WR0.3); (4) no WR (control = CONT). After the warm-up protocols, players performed 2 sets of 20-min SSG. The RCoD was collected at the 8th min of SSG (SSG 1-8 min), the 15th min of SSG1 (SSG1-15 min), and at the 15th min of SSG2 (SSG2-15 min). Outcomes included mean and total RCoD indices (i.e., mean time and total time for each condition).

RESULTS

Based on the outcomes of a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), WR0.1 and WR0.2 were more effective than control in dampening the decrease of RCoD's total time during SSG1-8 min, and SSG2-15 min (small ES: 0.24-0.35; p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between WR0.3 and control. In addition, WR0.1 and WR0.2 significantly affected the decreases in RCoD's mean best time during SSG1 and SSG2 which was observed in the unloaded condition (CONT) and consequently displayed a lower rate of RCoD performance decrease.

CONCLUSION

This study reports that wearing lower extremity WRs with micro-loads of 0.1% or 0.2% of body mass attenuates physical fatigue indicated in attenuated RCoD performance while executing SSG.

Effects of lower limb light-weight wearable resistance on running biomechanics

Wearable resistance allows individualized loading for sport specific movements and can lead to specific strength adaptations benefiting the athlete. The objective was to determine biomechanical changes during running with lower limb light-weight wearable resistance. Fourteen participants (age: 28 ± 4 years; height: 180 ± 8 cm; body mass: 77 ± 6 kg) wore shorts and calf sleeves of a compression suit allowing attachment of light loads. Participants completed four times two mins 20-m over-ground shuttle running bouts at 3.3 m*s^-1 alternated by three mins rest. The first running bout was unloaded and the other three bouts were under randomised loaded conditions (1%, 3% and 5% additional loading of the individual body mass). 3D motion cameras and force plates recorded kinematic and kinetic data at the midpoint of each 20-m shuttle. Friedman-test for repeated measures and linear mixed effect model analysis were used to determine differences between the loading conditions (α = 0.05). Increased peak vertical ground reaction force (2.7 N/kg to 2.74 N/kg), ground contact time (0.20 s to 0.21 s) and decreased step length (1.49 m to 1.45 m) were found with additional 5 % body mass loading compared to unloaded running (0.001 > p < 0.007). Marginally more knee flexion and hip extension and less plantarflexion was seen with higher loading. Differences in the assessed parameters were present between each loading condition but accompanied by subject variability. Further studies, also examining long term effects, should be conducted to further inform use of this training tool.

Does Warming Up With Wearable Resistance Influence Internal and External Training Load in National Level Soccer Players?

BACKGROUND

Adding wearable resistance (WR) to training results in superior performance compared with unloaded conditions. However, it is unclear if adding WR during warm-up influences training load (TL) in the subsequent session. The aim of this research was to track TL in soccer players during the transition from late preseason to early in-season and examine whether adding WR to the lower leg during a warm-up influenced TL measures during warm-ups and on-field training sessions after WR was removed.

HYPOTHESIS

The addition of WR worn on the lower legs during an on-field warm-up would lead to decreases in relatively high-intensity external TL metrics, such as distance covered >6.11 m∙s^-1 and acceleration and deceleration >/<3 m∙s^-2 and increases in internal TL during the warm-up, yet would have little effect on the subsequent training session when WR was removed.

STUDY DESIGN

Matched-pair randomized design.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

METHODS

A total of 28 soccer players were allocated to either a WR training (WRT = 14) or unloaded (control [CON] = 14) group. Both groups performed the same warm-up and on-field training for 8 weeks, with the WRT group wearing 200 g to 600 g loads on their lower leg during the warm-up. External TL was measured via global positioning system data and internal TL was assessed using session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE × time per session).

RESULTS

No statistically significant between-group differences (P ≥ 0.05) were identified for any TL measurement during either warm-ups or training sessions. Lower leg WR resulted in trivial to moderate effects for all external TL metrics (-16.9% to 2.40%; d = -0.61 to 0.14) and sRPE (-0.33%; d = -0.03) during the warm-up and trivial to small effects on all external TL metrics (-8.95% to -0.36%; d = -0.45 to -0.30) and sRPE (3.39%; d = 0.33) during training sessions.

CONCLUSION

Warming up with lower leg WR negatively affects neither the quality and quantity of the warm-up nor the subsequent training session once WR is removed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Using WR on the lower leg during on-field warm-ups may be a means to "microdose" strength training while not unduly increasing TL. However, further research is needed to determine the influence of WR on strength qualities.

Effects of forearm wearable resistance during accelerated sprints: From a standing start position

Fusiform weighted garments enable specific loading strategies during sport-specific movements. Loading the arms over during accelerated sprinting from a 2-point start position is pertinent to a variety of sporting performances. Fourteen sprint-trained individuals (age = 20.61 ± 1.16 years; height = 1.73 m ± 3.85 cm; body mass 65.33 ± 4.86 kg; personal best 100-m race time 11.40 ± 0.39 s) performed unloaded/loaded wearable resistance (WR) sprints. Between-condition step kinematics and kinetics were compared over four acceleration phases: steps 1-4, 5-8, 9-12 and 13-16. Sprint performance did not differ between unloaded and loaded WR at 10-m (-1.41%; ES = -0.32), or 30-m (-0.76%; ES = -0.24). Sprinting with forearm WR significantly decreased step frequency during phase two (p < 0.05, -3.42%; ES = -0.81) and three (-3.60%; ES = -0.86) and step velocity during phase four of the 30 m sprinting task (p < 0.05, -3.61%; ES: 0.91) only. There were no significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between step kinetics amongst the two conditions. Findings indicate that arm-loaded WR may provide specific sprinting overload for 2-point starting positions. This may be relevant to a wider sporting context such as field and team sport performances.

Effects of Warming Up With Lower-Body Wearable Resistance on Physical Performance Measures in Soccer Players Over an 8-Week Training Cycle

Bustos, A, Metral, G, Cronin, J, Uthoff, A, and Dolcetti, J. Effects of warming up with lower-body wearable resistance on physical performance measures in soccer players over an 8-week training cycle. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1220-1226, 2020-Warm-ups provide an opportune time to integrate specific movements to improve performance. This study aimed to examine the effects of adding wearable resistance (WR) lower-limb loading to a warm-up on physical performance measures in soccer athletes. Thirty-one national-level soccer players (aged 16-18 years) were matched for speed and allocated to either a WR training (WRT = 15) or an unloaded (CON = 16) group. Both groups performed the same warm-up 2-3x·wk for 8 weeks with the WRT group wearing 200- to 600-g loads on their calves. Pre-training, mid-training, and post-training data were collected for 10- and 20-m sprint times, repeated sprint ability, and vertical countermovement jump (CMJ) and horizontal countermovement jump (standing long jump [SLJ]) performance. Wearable resistance training improved pre-training to post-training 10- and 20-m sprint times more than the unloaded training (effect size [ES] = -1.06 to -0.96, respectively; 60.0-66.7 vs. 18.8-37.5% > smallest worthwhile change [SWC]). Both groups decreased CMJ over the first 4 weeks (ES ≥ 0.45) and increased CMJ performance over the second 4 weeks of training (ES ≥ 0.27). Both the WRT and CON groups improved SLJ performance after the 8-week training block (ES = 0.85 and 0.93, respectively; 86.7 and 62.5% > SWC, respectively), yet no differences were identified between groups. These findings indicate that 8 weeks (23 sessions) of WR training appears to elicit practically meaningful improvements in accelerated sprinting and horizontal jumping performance. Strength and conditioning practitioners should consider including WR in sports where sprinting and horizontal force production are critical performance indicators.

Force-velocity profile changes with forearm wearable resistance during standing start sprinting

Abstract Horizontal force-velocity (F-V) profiling is a strategy to assess athletes' individual performance capabilities during sprinting. This study investigated the acute changes in F-V profiles during sprinting of fourteen collegiate male sprinters with a mean 100-m sprint time of 11.40 ± 0.39 s, from a split-stance starting position. The subjects sprinted 30-m with, and without, wearable resistance (WR) equivalent to 2% body mass, attached to their forearms. Sprinting time at 5, 10, 20, and 30-m was assessed using laser technology. External horizontal F-V relationships were calculated via velocity-time signals. Maximal theoretical velocity (V ₀), theoretical relative and absolute horizontal force (F ₀), and horizontal power (P _max) were determined from the F-V relationship. Paired t-tests were used to determine statistical differences (p ≤ 0.05) in variables across conditions with Cohen's d as effect sizes (ES) calculated to assess practical changes. Sprint times at 10-m and beyond were significantly increased (1.9-3.3%, p 0.01-0.03, ES 0.46-0.60) with WR compared to unloaded sprinting. The only significant change in F-V with the WR condition was found in relative P _{max system} (-6.1%, p 0.01, ES 0.66). A small decrease was reported in V ₀ (-1.0%, p 0.11, ES 0.27), with small to medium ES decreases reported in F ₀ (-4.8% to -6.1%, p 0.07-0.21, ES 0.25-0.51) and P _max (-4.3% to -4.6%, p 0.06-0.08, ES 0.32-0.45). The greater changes to F ₀ and P _max suggest that forearm WR may be a possible training tool for athletes who wish to focus on force and power adaptation during sprint acceleration from a standing start.

Acute Metabolic Changes with Thigh-Positioned Wearable Resistances during Submaximal Running in Endurance-Trained Runners

The aim of this study was to determine the acute metabolic effects of different magnitudes of wearable resistance (WR) attached to the thigh during submaximal running. Twenty endurance-trained runners (40.8 ± 8.2 years, 1.77 ± 0.7 m, 75.4 ± 9.2 kg) completed six submaximal eight-minute running trials unloaded and with WRs of 1%, 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% body mass (BM), in a random order. The use of a WR resulted in a 1.6 ± 0.6% increase in oxygen consumption (VO₂) for every 1% BM of additional load. Inferential based analysis found that the loading of ≥3% BM was needed to elicit any substantial responses in VO₂, with an increase that was likely to be moderate in scale (effect size (ES) ± 90% confidential interval (CI): 0.24 ± 0.07). Using heart rate data, a training load score was extrapolated to quantify the amount of internal stress. For every 1% BM of WR, there is an extra 0.17 ± 0.06 estimated increase in training load. A WR ≥3% of BM was needed to elicit substantial responses in lactate production, with an increase which was very likely to be large in scale (ES ± 90% CI: 0.41 ± 0.18). A thigh-positioned WR provides a running-specific overload with loads ≥3% BM, resulting in substantial changes in metabolic responses.

Thigh positioned wearable resistance affects step frequency not step length during 50 m sprint-running

This study determined the acute changes in spatio-temporal and impulse variables when wearable resistance (WR) of 2% body mass was attached distally to the thighs during 50 m maximal sprint-running. Fifteen sub-elite male sprinters performed sprints with and without WR over 50 m of in-ground force platforms in a randomised order. A paired t-test was used to determine statistical differences (p < .05), with effect sizes (ES) calculated between conditions over steps: 1-4, 5-14, and 15-23. WR resulted in small increased 10 and 50 m sprint times (1.0%, ES = 0.31, 0.9%, ES = 0.44, respectively, p > .05) compared to the unloaded sprint condition. For spatio-temporal variables, the WR condition resulted in moderate ES changes in step frequency (-2.8%, ES = -0.53, steps 5-14, p > .05), and contact time (2.5%, ES = 0.57, steps 5-14, and 3.2%, ES = 0.51, average of 23 steps, p > .05), while step length was unaffected during all step phases of the sprint (ES = 0.02-0.07, p > .05). Regarding kinetics, during steps 5-14, WR resulted in a moderate decrease (-4.8%, ES = -0.73, p < .05) in net anterior-posterior impulses and a moderate decrease in vertical stiffness (-5.7%, ES = -0.57, p > .05). For athletes seeking to overload step frequency and develop anterior-posterior impulse during mid to late accelerated sprinting, WR enables the application of a sprint-specific form of resistance training to be completed without decreasing step length.

The effects of lower limb wearable resistance on sprint running performance: A systematic review

The aim of this review was to examine the literature that has used lower limb wearable resistance (WR) during sprint running. A systematic search was completed to identify acute and longitudinal studies assessing the effects of lower limb WR on sprint running performance from international peer-reviewed journals. The Boolean phrases (limb OR leg OR lower extremity) AND (sprint*) AND (resist* OR weight OR load*) were used to search PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science electronic databases. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis that reported the acute kinematic and kinetic effects (n = 8), acute performance effects (n = 3), and longitudinal effects (n = 1). Results showed that the WR micro-loading (0.6-5% body mass) significantly increased contact time (2.9-8.9%), decreased step frequency (-1.4 to -3.7%), and slowed total sprint times (0.6-7.4%). Unloaded sprinting immediately following sprints with lower limb WR resulted in no significant  change to total sprinting times. One longitudinal training study did not find a significant effect on maximal sprinting speed for non-trained participants. It can be concluded that not all step kinematic variables are affected during sprinting with an added load up to 5% body mass. Therefore, coaches can use lower limb WR to selectively overload certain aspects of sprint running, in particular stride frequency. It also appears that lower limb WR overloads sprint movement velocity and may provide a stimulus to increase horizontal force output, therefore, it may be inferred that lower limb WR has the potential to elicit improved sprinting performance.