This review analyzes relevant variables involved in acute interference effects of concurrent training (CT) sessions of aerobic exercise followed by strength exercises. The aerobic exercise intensity, mode, volume, duration of recovery interval between exercises, muscle groups involved, and utilization of ergogenic aids are the variables identified in this review. High-intensity interval aerobic exercises result in more pronounced negative effects on strength-endurance exercise but not in maximal strength. Cycling results in more negative effects on strength endurance performance exercise than running. A 4-hour to 8-hour recovery interval seems to be enough to avoid interference on strength-endurance performance. Reduction in strength-endurance performance is located in muscle groups involved in both exercises. Low aerobic exercise volume (3 km) with; 18 minutes of duration does not diminish strength endurance, whereas higher volumes (5 and 7 km) with ;30 and ;42 minutes of duration, respectively, generate impairments. Caffeine, carbohydrate, and beta-alanine are not able to revert the deleterious effect on strength-endurance performance, whereas creatine and capsaicin analog supplementation are. Thus, these variables must be taken into consideration to prescribe and organize a CT session. This information may help coaches to organize exercise sessions that minimize or avoid the impairment in strength performance after aerobic exercises.

The TSAC Report is the NSCA’s quarterly, online-only publication designed for the training of tactical professionals, operators, and facilitators. You must be a member of the NSCA to access the TSAC Report.

The NSCA offers an Exam Prep Live Clinic for individuals preparing for the Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist (CSCS) exam. The CSCS Exam Prep Live Clinics are offered in three formats: 2-Day and 3-Day options with a blend of classroom lecture and hands-on training. Additional Clinics are added to the calendar every 2-3 months.

The countermovement jump (CMJ) is one of the most used performance assessments in strength and conditioning. Although numerous studies discuss the usability of different metrics in this test, this is often performed within the context of a specific aim. However, to our knowledge, no information currently exists providing practitioners with some over-arching recommendations on which metrics to choose when the purpose of using the test differs. This article discusses how the metrics selected to monitor during CMJ testing may differ when aiming to use it as a proxy for athletic performance, as part of neuromuscular fatigue monitoring, or as part of a test battery for return to performance in injured athletes.

Resistance training (RT) is a nonpharmacological complement to cancer treatments due to its effectiveness in attenuating sarcopenia, cardiotoxicity, fatigue, and emotional disorders common in oncology patients. To adequately program and evaluate the acute or long-term effects of this type of training, a proper evaluation of the patients’ strength levels is necessary. Strength evaluations traditionally applied to this population required reaching muscle or technical failure, which could increase their discomfort levels, risk of injury, or other complications associated with the disease. In this regard, this manuscript described different dynamic and isometric evaluations recommended to accurately and safely evaluate the strength of the oncology population. Concerning dynamic evaluations, the velocity based method is recommended to determine the capacity of the patient to apply force against maximal (i.e., 1 repetition maximum) and submaximal loads. The sit-to-stand or vertical jump tests are also proposed as alternatives to evaluate dynamic strength using body weight. For isometric assessments, the knee extension and handgrip tests could complement dynamic evaluations or replace them for patients with very low strength levels. Besides describing in depth the aforementioned evaluations, the current review proposes important methodological aspects to ensure their accurate, reliable, and safe implementation.

Athletes engage in training programs that develop physical and physiological attributes to improve performance over time. However, ensuring athletes are optimally prepared just before competition is also of utmost importance. Indeed, such approaches may often adopt 1 or more strategies in the days, hours, and minutes preceding competition, including exercise priming, active warmup, and/or postactivation performance enhancing (PAPE) activities. Despite a plethora of discrete research, such information seems poorly synthesized, making it difficult for coaches and athletes to implement optimal evidence based physical preparation approaches in many sporting contexts. This article aims to provide a scoping overview of evidence, facilitate discussion, and where possible, propose practical exercise based recommendations that may be useful leading up to (~48 hours–~1 minute) tasks with a short or prolonged endurance component or requiring repeated intermittent efforts (e.g., team based field sports). Well-timed and –designed activities can facilitate several aspects of physical performance, potentially improve athletes’ psychological state(s) and mental preparedness. The benefits of a warm-up are most well documented, but priming and PAPE strategies also warrant consideration. It is intended that the evidence and suggestions presented will be useful for strength and conditioning professionals preparing athletes for competition.

Learn, participate and network with colleagues at (location) while earning CEUs. Hosted by the state, provincial and regional directors, this local event brings cutting-edge research and application to your backyard.