The comparison of the effects of post-activity performance enhancement on foot plantar pressure and vertical jump in traditional set and cluster set training configurations
Background: There is no study about the effects of post-activity performance enhancement on foot plantar pressure and vertical jump in different set configurations. This study aimed to compare the effects of post-activity performance enhancement on foot plantar pressure and vertical jump in trad...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MRE Press
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Men's Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://oss.jomh.org/files/article/20250328-511/pdf/JOMH2024072001.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: There is no study about the effects of post-activity
performance enhancement on foot plantar pressure and vertical jump in different
set configurations. This study aimed to compare the effects of
post-activity performance enhancement on foot plantar pressure and vertical jump
in traditional set and cluster set training configurations. Methods: The
study included 27 volunteer university students (age: 20.0 ± 1.2 year,
height: 180.2 ± 6.9 cm, body weight: 76.0 ± 11.8 kg). Static foot
plantar pressure (SFPP), countermovement jump (CMJ), and squat jump (SJ) were
performed as pre-tests 8 min after the half-squat 1 repetition maximum (HS
1RM) test. After pre-tests, 12 reps of training
were performed with 70% of the HS 1RM by varying the training configurations of
1 × 12 reps traditional set (TS) on the 4th day, 3 × 4 reps
cluster set 1 (CS1) with 30 s rest on the 8th day, and 6 × 2 reps
cluster set 2 (CS2) with 10 s rest on the 12th day. Post-tests were performed in
the following of each configuration. Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA) was used for the statistical comparison of the tests in four different
time intervals. Results: There were no statistically significant SFPP
differences in four different time periods, while statistically significant
differences were found in the CMJ (p < 0.001) and SJ (p =
0.002). Pairwise comparisons showed that CMJ pre-test (CMJPRE) had
statistically significant differences with CMJTS, CMJCS1 and
CMJCS2. There were also differences between SJPRE and SJCS1,
SJTS and SJCS2 for the SJ (p < 0.05). Conclusions:
In conclusion, based on the results of the study, it is recommended to use any of
the TS, CS1 and CS2 configurations to increase CMJ and to use the CS1
configuration to increase SJ as a performance enhancement at 8 min post-activity. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1875-6867 1875-6859 |