Aymen Ben Othman,Saman Hadjizadeh Anvar,José Carlos Aragão-Santos,Anis Chaouachi,David G Behm
{"title":"Age, Sex, and Training Specific Effects on Cross-Education Training.","authors":"Aymen Ben Othman,Saman Hadjizadeh Anvar,José Carlos Aragão-Santos,Anis Chaouachi,David G Behm","doi":"10.1123/pes.2024-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An extensive number of publications have examined cross-education effects with adults, primarily investigating contralateral homologous (same) muscles. There are far fewer investigations on cross-education effects on contralateral heterologous (different) muscles and age (youth vs adult) and no studies investigating sex differences. Hence, the objective was to compare cross-education in female and male youth and young adults to contralateral homologous (chest press [CP], elbow flexors and extensors, handgrip isometric strength, and shot put) and heterologous (leg press, knee extension isometric strength, and countermovement jump) muscles. Twenty-eight female adults, 28 female youth, 28 male adults, and 28 male youth (total: 112) were examined before and after an 8-week (3 sessions/wk) unilateral, dominant arm, CP training program. Unilateral testing assessed dominant and nondominant leg press and CP 1-repetition maximum, knee extensors, elbow extensors, elbow flexors, and handgrip maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength, as well as shot put distance and countermovement jump height. Unilateral CP training induced training specific (CP 1-repetition maximum) and nonspecific (elbow extensors, elbow flexors, handgrip MVIC force, and shot put distance) improvements (P < .04, η2: .45-.85) but no significant lower body improvements. There was evidence for testing limb specificity as the dominant arm provided significantly (P < .021, η2: .17-.75) greater training gains than the nondominant arm. Youth's training adaptations exceeded with unilateral CP 1-repetition maximum, elbow extensors MVIC force, and shot put distance (P < .049, η2: .14-.49). No sex main effect differences were apparent. In conclusion, cross-education was training specific (greatest gains with upper body and dominant limbs) with greater benefits for youth and generally no sex differences with the exception of elbow extensors MVIC.","PeriodicalId":49712,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Exercise Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Exercise Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.2024-0027","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
An extensive number of publications have examined cross-education effects with adults, primarily investigating contralateral homologous (same) muscles. There are far fewer investigations on cross-education effects on contralateral heterologous (different) muscles and age (youth vs adult) and no studies investigating sex differences. Hence, the objective was to compare cross-education in female and male youth and young adults to contralateral homologous (chest press [CP], elbow flexors and extensors, handgrip isometric strength, and shot put) and heterologous (leg press, knee extension isometric strength, and countermovement jump) muscles. Twenty-eight female adults, 28 female youth, 28 male adults, and 28 male youth (total: 112) were examined before and after an 8-week (3 sessions/wk) unilateral, dominant arm, CP training program. Unilateral testing assessed dominant and nondominant leg press and CP 1-repetition maximum, knee extensors, elbow extensors, elbow flexors, and handgrip maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength, as well as shot put distance and countermovement jump height. Unilateral CP training induced training specific (CP 1-repetition maximum) and nonspecific (elbow extensors, elbow flexors, handgrip MVIC force, and shot put distance) improvements (P < .04, η2: .45-.85) but no significant lower body improvements. There was evidence for testing limb specificity as the dominant arm provided significantly (P < .021, η2: .17-.75) greater training gains than the nondominant arm. Youth's training adaptations exceeded with unilateral CP 1-repetition maximum, elbow extensors MVIC force, and shot put distance (P < .049, η2: .14-.49). No sex main effect differences were apparent. In conclusion, cross-education was training specific (greatest gains with upper body and dominant limbs) with greater benefits for youth and generally no sex differences with the exception of elbow extensors MVIC.
期刊介绍:
Pediatric Exercise Science is a journal committed to enriching the scientific knowledge of exercise during childhood and adolescence. To this end it publishes information that contributes to an understanding of (a) the unique aspects of the physiologic, physical, biochemical, and psychologic responses of children to exercise, (b) the role of exercise in the treatment of pediatric chronic diseases, (c) the importance of physical activity in the prevention of illness and preservation of wellness, and (d) the means by which participation in sports may be made safer and more enjoyable for children and youth. Consideration will be given for publication of work by various methodologies consistent with the scientific approach.
Besides original research, the journal includes review articles, abstracts from other journals, book reviews, and editorial comments. Pediatric Exercise Science encourages the expression of conflicting opinions regarding children and exercise by providing a forum for alternative viewpoints. At the same time it serves as a means of accumulating a base of research information that will allow application of experimental data to clinical practice. The scientific disciplines contributing to this body of knowledge are diverse. Therefore it is the purpose of this journal to provide a common focus for disseminating advances in the science of exercise during childhood. In doing so, the journal allows the opportunity for cross-fertilization of ideas between disciplines that will potentiate the growth of knowledge in this field. Pediatric Exercise Science seeks to stimulate new ideas regarding exercise in children and to increase the awareness of scientists, health care providers, and physical educators of the importance of exercise during childhood.