A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The Effects of Slow Breathing during Inter-Set Recovery on Power Performance in the Barbell Back Squat. | LitMetric

Slow breathing (SB) reduces sympathetic nervous system activity, the heart rate (HR), and blood pressure (BP) and increases parasympathetic nervous system activity, HR variability, and oxygen saturation which may lead to quicker recovery between bouts of exercise. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine whether a SB technique using the 4-7-8 method between sets of barbell back squats (SQs) would attenuate drops in power and bar velocity. In a randomized, crossover design, 18 healthy resistance-trained college-aged males (age: 20.7 ± 1.4 years, body height: 178.6 ± 6.4 cm, body mass: 82.2 ± 15.0 kg, 4.5 ± 2.4 years of experience) performed 5 sets of 3 repetitions of SQs with normal breathing (CON) or SB during the 3-min recovery between sets. Peak and average power and bar velocity were assessed using a linear positioning transducer. HR recovery (RHR), systolic BP recovery (RBP), the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and the rating of perceived recovery score (RS) were assessed after each set. There were no significant differences between conditions for peak and average power and bar velocity, RBP, RPE, and RS (p > 0.211). SB led to a greater RHR after set 2 (SB: 51.0 ± 14.9 bpm vs. CON: 44.5 ± 11.5 bpm, p = 0.025) and 3 (SB: 48.3 ± 13.5 bpm vs. CON: 37.7 ± 11.7 bpm, p = 0.006) compared to the CON condition. SB was well tolerated, did not hinder nor improve training performance and improved RHR after the middle sets of SQs. Further investigations are warranted to examine the effects of other SB techniques and to determine SB's effects on different training stimuli as well as its effects over an entire workout and post-workout recovery metrics.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11307190PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jhk/185935DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

power bar
12
bar velocity
12
slow breathing
8
nervous system
8
system activity
8
peak average
8
average power
8
rating perceived
8
bpm con
8
recovery
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!