Completing The ACSM Push-up Test Following A Dynamic Warm-up With And Without Rehearsal Push-ups

The maximal push-up test (MPUT) is one of the most widely used assessments for upper-body muscular endurance and can be a requirement for admission or promotion in many physical-based industries. The literature has evolved specific warm-up strategies to optimize muscular strength assessments through a dynamic warm-up and the use of rehearsal exercises prior to the test. However there is inadequate information on how to optimize muscular endurance assessments. While the evidence supports the benefit of a dynamic warm-up prior to a MPUT, the literature lacks information if and how rehearsal push-ups (rPU) can benefit MPUT. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of a dynamic warm-up with and without rPU prior to a MPUT. METHODS: 66 participants (age 21 ± 4 yr, female = 21, male = 45) ranging from low to very high fitness levels completed two randomized trials separated by 7-10 days. In one trial subjects completed a standardized dynamic warm-up (~120 s) followed by rPU (12.0 ± 0.4 % (mean ± SD) of PU completed), a 180 s rest and then the ACSM MPUT. During the other trial subjects did not complete rehearsal push-ups (noPU). Data was analyzed through paired t-tests for ALL subjects, those completing less than 37 push-ups (untrained, UT, n = 37) and those completing 37 or more push-ups (trained, TR, n = 29). RESULTS: There was no difference in ALL participants push-up performance with rPU (noPU 38.4 ± 2.1, rPU 39.1 ± 2.3, p = 0.14) or between the 1st and 2nd trial (1st 38.3 ± 2.2, 2nd 39.2 ± 2.2, p = 0.16). There was no difference in UT participants with rPU (noPU 27.9 ± 1.1, rPU 27.4 ± 1.1, p = 0.35), but on average UT performed better during the 2nd trial (1st 26.9 ± 1.1, 2nd 28.3 ± 1.2, p = 0.01). TR participants performed better following rPU (noPU 52.3 ± 2.7, rPU 54.4 ± 2.9, p = 0.02) but there was no difference between the 1st and second trial. (1st 53.0 ± 2.7, 2nd 53.6 ± 2.9, p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Results revealed that ALL and UT participants did not benefit from rPU, but TR individuals improved. On average, only UT individuals improved following the first trial. Currently we are collecting data that includes a longer rest period of 300 sec prior to the MPUT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001055936.39272.16
Primary Topic
Aerospace and Aviation Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Completing The ACSM Push-up Test Following A Dynamic Warm-up With And Without Rehearsal Push-ups

Jessica Oehrlein, Brandon Mgeni, Jason L. Talanian
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Aerospace and Aviation Technology
article

Completing The ACSM Push-up Test Following A Dynamic Warm-up With And Without Rehearsal Push-ups

Jessica Oehrlein, Brandon Mgeni, Jason L. Talanian
article en

Abstract

The maximal push-up test (MPUT) is one of the most widely used assessments for upper-body muscular endurance and can be a requirement for admission or promotion in many physical-based industries. The literature has evolved specific warm-up strategies to optimize muscular strength assessments through a dynamic warm-up and the use of rehearsal exercises prior to the test. However there is inadequate information on how to optimize muscular endurance assessments. While the evidence supports the benefit of a dynamic warm-up prior to a MPUT, the literature lacks information if and how rehearsal push-ups (rPU) can benefit MPUT. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of a dynamic warm-up with and without rPU prior to a MPUT. METHODS: 66 participants (age 21 ± 4 yr, female = 21, male = 45) ranging from low to very high fitness levels completed two randomized trials separated by 7-10 days. In one trial subjects completed a standardized dynamic warm-up (~120 s) followed by rPU (12.0 ± 0.4 % (mean ± SD) of PU completed), a 180 s rest and then the ACSM MPUT. During the other trial subjects did not complete rehearsal push-ups (noPU). Data was analyzed through paired t-tests for ALL subjects, those completing less than 37 push-ups (untrained, UT, n = 37) and those completing 37 or more push-ups (trained, TR, n = 29). RESULTS: There was no difference in ALL participants push-up performance with rPU (noPU 38.4 ± 2.1, rPU 39.1 ± 2.3, p = 0.14) or between the 1st and 2nd trial (1st 38.3 ± 2.2, 2nd 39.2 ± 2.2, p = 0.16). There was no difference in UT participants with rPU (noPU 27.9 ± 1.1, rPU 27.4 ± 1.1, p = 0.35), but on average UT performed better during the 2nd trial (1st 26.9 ± 1.1, 2nd 28.3 ± 1.2, p = 0.01). TR participants performed better following rPU (noPU 52.3 ± 2.7, rPU 54.4 ± 2.9, p = 0.02) but there was no difference between the 1st and second trial. (1st 53.0 ± 2.7, 2nd 53.6 ± 2.9, p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Results revealed that ALL and UT participants did not benefit from rPU, but TR individuals improved. On average, only UT individuals improved following the first trial. Currently we are collecting data that includes a longer rest period of 300 sec prior to the MPUT.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
Fitchburg State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Aerospace and Aviation Technology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.