Valente J1, Ribeiro F2, Gonçalves RS1,3
1Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, Coimbra Health School, Coimbra, Portugal, 2University of Aveiro, School of Health Sciences and Institute of Biomedicine (iBiMED), Aveiro, Portugal, 3University of Coimbra, Centre for Health Studies and Research (CEISUC), Coimbra, Portugal
Background: The pre-activity warm-up is a widely accepted practice preceding a competitive football match or training session. It is considered essential for physical performance optimization and injury prevention. Currently, especially in amateur football clubs, the traditional warm-up routines are often criticized for not being able to adequately prepare the athlete for the requirements of the competitive match or training session. For this reason, new warm-up routines have been developed, as is the case of the movement preparation warm-up.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate and to compare the acute effects of two different warm-up protocols on the physical performance of football players: traditional warm-up vs. movement preparation warm-up.
Methods: A randomized crossover trial was conducted on 18 male amateur and semi-professional football players (age: 19.94 ± 2.04 years; training experience: 10.28 ± 2.80 years). All participants completed the traditional warm-up and the movement preparation warm-up protocols in a randomized order on different days (7 to 14 days apart). Flexibility (Sit and Reach Test), dynamic balance (Y-Balance Test), agility (T-Test), explosive strength (Standing Long Jump Test) and sprint ability (20m Sprint Test) were evaluated before and after the warm-up routines. Statistical analyses were performed using paired sample t-test.
Results: The sample demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all of the tests of physical performance between before and after the warm-up, for the traditional warm-up (Sit and Reach Test: p 0.001; anterior Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p= 0.008; T-Test: p 0.001; Standing Long Jump Test: p 0.001; 20m Sprint Test: p 0.001) and for the movement preparation warm-up (Sit and Reach Test: p 0.001; anterior Y-Balance Test: p= 0.001; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; T-Test: p 0.001; Standing Long Jump Test: p 0.001; 20m Sprint Test: p 0.001). The comparison between the improvements in the physical performance following each warm-up protocol revealed the absence of statistically significant differences (Sit and Reach Test: p= 0.152; anterior Y-Balance Test: p= 0.188; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p= 0.689; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p= 0.618; T-Test: p= 0.390; Standing Long Jump Test: p= 0.408; 20m Sprint Test: p= 0.254).
Conclusion(s): The traditional warm-up and the movement preparation warm-up had a comparable positive effect on flexibility, dynamic balance, agility, explosive strength, and sprint ability in soccer players of football players.
Implications: The movement preparation warm-up can be used as an alternative to traditional warm-up.
Keywords: traditional warm-up, movement preparation warm-up, physical performance
Funding acknowledgements: The work was unfunded.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate and to compare the acute effects of two different warm-up protocols on the physical performance of football players: traditional warm-up vs. movement preparation warm-up.
Methods: A randomized crossover trial was conducted on 18 male amateur and semi-professional football players (age: 19.94 ± 2.04 years; training experience: 10.28 ± 2.80 years). All participants completed the traditional warm-up and the movement preparation warm-up protocols in a randomized order on different days (7 to 14 days apart). Flexibility (Sit and Reach Test), dynamic balance (Y-Balance Test), agility (T-Test), explosive strength (Standing Long Jump Test) and sprint ability (20m Sprint Test) were evaluated before and after the warm-up routines. Statistical analyses were performed using paired sample t-test.
Results: The sample demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all of the tests of physical performance between before and after the warm-up, for the traditional warm-up (Sit and Reach Test: p 0.001; anterior Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p= 0.008; T-Test: p 0.001; Standing Long Jump Test: p 0.001; 20m Sprint Test: p 0.001) and for the movement preparation warm-up (Sit and Reach Test: p 0.001; anterior Y-Balance Test: p= 0.001; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p 0.001; T-Test: p 0.001; Standing Long Jump Test: p 0.001; 20m Sprint Test: p 0.001). The comparison between the improvements in the physical performance following each warm-up protocol revealed the absence of statistically significant differences (Sit and Reach Test: p= 0.152; anterior Y-Balance Test: p= 0.188; posteromedial Y-Balance Test: p= 0.689; posterolateral Y-Balance Test: p= 0.618; T-Test: p= 0.390; Standing Long Jump Test: p= 0.408; 20m Sprint Test: p= 0.254).
Conclusion(s): The traditional warm-up and the movement preparation warm-up had a comparable positive effect on flexibility, dynamic balance, agility, explosive strength, and sprint ability in soccer players of football players.
Implications: The movement preparation warm-up can be used as an alternative to traditional warm-up.
Keywords: traditional warm-up, movement preparation warm-up, physical performance
Funding acknowledgements: The work was unfunded.
Topic: Sport & sports injuries; Musculoskeletal; Primary health care
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Coimbra Health School, Coimbra, Portugal
Ethics committee: Review Board of Coimbra Health School
Ethics number: CTC 4/2016
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
