Evaluation of the Vmaxpro sensor for assessing movement velocity and load-velocity variables: accuracy and implications for practical use.

We investigated the ecological validity of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) (Vmaxpro) to assess the movement velocity (MV) during a 1-repetition maximum (1RM) test and for the prediction of load-velocity (L-V) variables, as well as the ecological intra- day and inter-day reliability during free-weight bench press (BP) and squat (SQ). Furthermore, we provide recommendations for the practical use of the sensor. Twenty-three strength-trained men completed an incremental 1RM test, whereas seventeen men further participated in another 3 sessions consisting of 3 repetitions with 4 different loads (30, 50, 70 and 90% of 1RM) to assess validity and intra- and inter-day reliability, respectively. The MV was assessed using the Vmaxpro and a 3D motion capture system (MoCap). L-V variables and the 1RM were calculated based on submaximal velocities. The Vmaxpro showed high validity during the 1RM test for BP (r = 0.935) and SQ (r = 0.900), but with decreasing validity at lower MVs. The L-V variables and the 1RM demonstrated high validity for BP (r = 0.808-0.942) and SQ (r = 0.615-0.741) with a systematic overestimation. Coefficients of variance for intra- and inter-day reliability ranged from 2.4% to 9.7% and from 3.2% to 8.6% for BP and SQ, respectively. The Vmaxpro appears valid at high and moderately valid at low MVs. Depending on the required degree of accuracy, the sensor may be sufficient for the prediction of L-V variables and the 1RM. Our data indicate the sensor to be suitable for monitoring changes in MVs within and between training sessions.

Acute Effects of Combined Lower-Body High-Intensity Interval Training and Upper-Body Strength Exercise on Explosive Strength Performance in Naturally Menstruating Women.

PURPOSE: We aimed at investigating the acute effects of lower-body high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on upper- and lower-body explosive strength assessed by mean propulsive velocity (MPV) in naturally menstruating women. In addition, we assessed the combination of lower-body HIIT and squat, as well as lower-body HIIT and bench press, on bench press and squat MPV. METHODS: Thirteen women (age: 23 [2] y, menstrual cycle length: 28.4 [2.0] d) completed 2 training modalities on separate days (separated by 30 [4.2] d) consisting of HIIT followed by lower-body (HIIT + LBS) or upper-body (HIIT + UBS) strength loading. Squat and bench press MPV were assessed before HIIT (T0), after HIIT (T1), after the strength loading (T2), and 24 hours postloading (T3). RESULTS: Mixed factorial analysis of variance indicated a significant effect for time in bench press and squat (P < .001) but not for interaction. Pairwise comparison showed that bench press MPV remained unchanged (P = 1.000) at T1 but was reduced at T2 compared with T0 (HIIT + LBS: -8.2% [3.9%], HIIT + UBS: -13.8% [12.1%], P < .001) and T1 (HIIT + LBS: -7.1% [3.2%], HIIT + UBS: -12.7% [8.7%], P < .001). Squat MPV decreased at T1 (HIIT + LBS: -6.0% [8.8%], HIIT + UBS: -4.8% [5.4%], P = .009) and was found to be decreased at T2 compared with T0 in both conditions (HIIT + LBS: -6.9% [3.3%], HIIT + UBS: -7.4% [6.1%], P < .001) but not compared with T1 (P = 1.000). Bench press and squat MPV returned to baseline at T3 compared with T0 (P > .050). CONCLUSION: Lower- but not upper-body explosive strength was reduced by HIIT. HIIT combined with upper- or lower-body strength loading resulted in a reduction of squat and bench press explosive strength.

Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of the Vmaxpro Sensor for Evaluation of Movement Velocity in the Deep Squat.

ABSTRACT: Feuerbacher, JF, Jacobs, MW, Dragutinovic, B, Goldmann, J-P, Cheng, S, and Schumann, M. Validity and test-retest reliability of the Vmaxpro sensor for evaluation of movement velocity in the deep squat. J Strength Cond Res 37(1): 35-40, 2023-We aimed at assessing the validity and test-retest reliability of the inertial measurement unit-based Vmaxpro sensor compared with a Vicon 3D motion capture system and the T-Force sensor during an incremental 1-repetition maximum (1RM) test and at submaximal loads. Nineteen subjects reported to the laboratory for the 1RM test sessions, whereas 15 subjects carried out another 3 sessions consisting of 3 repetitions with 4 different intensities (30, 50, 70, and 90% of 1RM) to determine the intra- and interday reliability. The Vmaxpro sensor showed high validity (Vicon: R2 = 0.935; T-Force: R2 = 0.968) but an overestimation of the mean velocities (MVs) of 0.06 ± 0.08 m·s-1 and 0.06 ± 0.06 m·s-1 compared with Vicon and T-Force, respectively. Regression analysis indicated a systematic bias that is increasing with higher MVs. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for Vmaxpro were moderate to high for intraday (ICC: 0.662-0.938; p ≤ 0.05) and for interday (ICC: 0.568-0.837; p ≤ 0.05) reliability, respectively. The Vmaxpro is a valid and reliable measurement device that can be used to monitor movement velocities within a training session. However, practitioners should be cautious when assessing movement velocities on separate days because of the moderate interday reliability.

Acute Effects of High-Intensity Interval Running on Lower-Body and Upper-Body Explosive Strength and Throwing Velocity in Handball Players.

ABSTRACT: Seipp, D, Feuerbacher, JF, Jacobs, MW, Dragutinovic, B, and Schumann, M. Acute effects of high-intensity interval running on lower-body and upper-body explosive strength and throwing velocity in handball players. J Strength Cond Res 36(11): 3167-3172, 2022-The purpose of this study was to determine the acute effects of handball-specific high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on explosive strength and throwing velocity, after varying periods of recovery. Fourteen highly trained male handball players (age: 25.4 (26.2 ± 4.2) performed HIIT consisting of repeated 15-second shuttle runs at 90% of final running speed (V IFT ) to exhaustion . Upper-body and lower-body explosive strength and throwing velocities were measured before and immediately after HIIT, as well as after 6 hours. These tests included 3 repetitions of both bench press and squat exercise at 60% of the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) as well as 3 repetitions of the set shot without run up and jump shot, respectively. Explosive squat performance was significantly reduced at post (-5.48%, p = 0.026) but not at 6 h (-0.24%, p = 1.000). Explosive bench press performance remained statistically unaltered at post (0.32%, p = 1.000) and at 6 hour (1.96%, p = 1.000). This was also observed in the subsequent throws both immediately after (-0.60%, p = 1.000) (-0.31%, p = 1.000) and at 6 h (-1.58%, p = 1.000) (1.51%, p = 0.647). Our data show a reduction in explosive strength of the lower but not upper extremities when preceded by running HIIT. Since throwing velocity was not affected by intense lower-body exercise, combining lower-body HIIT and throwing practice may be of no concern in highly trained handball players.

Acute Effects of Concurrent High-Intensity Interval Cycling and Bench-Press Loading on Upper- and Lower-Body Explosive Strength Performance.

PURPOSE: This study examined the acute effects of lower-body high-intensity interval loading (HIIT) on explosive upper- and lower-body strength, as well as the combined effect of HIIT and bench-press loading versus HIIT and squat loading on the explosive upper- and lower-body strength. METHODS: Fifteen physically active men completed 2 sessions consisting of HIIT (4 × 4 min cycling at 80% of peak power output) immediately followed by lower- (HIIT + LBS) or upper-body (HIIT + UBS) strength loading (3 × 5 + 3 × 3 repetitions at 80% 1-repetition maximum [ie, 6 sets in total]) in a randomized order. Squat and bench-press mean propulsive velocity (MPV) was assessed before HIIT (T0), immediately after HIIT (T1), immediately after the strength loading (T2), and 24 hours after the experimental session (T3). RESULTS: Squat MPV decreased to a similar magnitude at T1 in HIIT + LBS (-5.3% [7.6%], P = .117, g = .597) and HIIT + UBS (-5.7% [6.9%], P = .016, g = .484), while bench press remained unchanged (-1.4% [4.7%], P = 1.000, g = .152, and -1.0% [7.0%], P = 1.000, g = .113, respectively). Both squat and bench-press MPV were statistically reduced at T2 compared to T0 (HIIT + LBS: -7.5% [7.8%], P = .016, g = .847, and -6.8% [4.6%], P < .001, g = .724; HIIT + UBS: -3.9% [3.8%], P = .007, g = .359, and -15.5% [6.7%], P < .001, d = 1.879). Bench-press MPV at T2 was significantly lower in HIIT + UBS when compared to HIIT + LBS (P = .002, d = 1.219). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate lower- but not upper-body explosive strength to be acutely reduced by preceding lower-body HIIT. However, lower-body HIIT combined with either upper- or lower-body strength loading resulted in a similar acute reduction of both squat and bench-press explosive strength.

Metabolic, hormonal and performance effects of isomaltulose ingestion before prolonged aerobic exercise: a double-blind, randomised, cross-over trial.

BACKGROUND: Isomaltulose has been discussed as a low glycaemic carbohydrate but evidence concerning performance benefits and physiological responses has produced varying results. Therefore, we primarily aimed to investigate the effects of isomaltulose ingestion compared to glucose and maltodextrin on fat and carbohydrate oxidation rates, blood glucose levels and serum hormone concentrations of insulin and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). As secondary aims, we assessed running performance and gastrointestinal discomfort. METHODS: Twenty-one male recreational endurance runners performed a 70-min constant load trial at 70% maximal running speed (Vmax), followed by a time to exhaustion (TTE) test at 85% Vmax after ingesting either 50 g isomaltulose, maltodextrin or glucose. Fat and carbohydrate oxidation rates were calculated from spiroergometric data. Venous blood samples for measurement of GIP and insulin were drawn before, after the constant load trial and after the TTE. Capillary blood samples for glucose concentrations and subjective feeling of gastrointestinal discomfort were collected every 10 min during the constant load trial. RESULTS: No between-condition differences were observed in the area under the curve analysis of fat (p = 0.576) and carbohydrate oxidation rates (p = 0.887). Isomaltulose ingestion led to lower baseline postprandial concentrations of blood glucose compared to maltodextrin (percent change [95% confidence interval], - 16.7% [- 21.8,-11.6], p < 0.001) and glucose (- 11.5% [- 17.3,-5.7], p = 0.001). Similarly, insulin and GIP concentrations were also lower following isomaltulose ingestion compared to maltodextrin (- 40.3% [- 50.5,-30.0], p = 0.001 and - 69.1% [- 74.3,-63.8], p < 0.001, respectively) and glucose (- 32.6% [- 43.9,-21.2], p = 0.012 and - 55.8% [- 70.7,-40.9], p < 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, glucose fluctuation was lower after isomaltulose ingestion compared to maltodextrin (- 26.0% [- 34.2,-17.8], p < 0.001) and glucose (- 17.4% [- 29.1,-5.6], p < 0.001). However, during and after exercise, no between-condition differences for glucose (p = 0.872), insulin (p = 0.503) and GIP (p = 0.244) were observed. No between-condition differences were found for TTE (p = 0.876) or gastrointestinal discomfort (p = 0.119). CONCLUSION: Isomaltulose ingestion led to lower baseline postprandial concentrations of glucose, insulin and GIP compared to maltodextrin and glucose. Consequently, blood glucose fluctuations were lower during treadmill running after isomaltulose ingestion, while no between-condition differences were observed for CHO and fat oxidation rates, treadmill running performance and gastrointestinal discomfort. Further research is required to provide specific guidelines on supplementing isomaltulose in performance and health settings.