A dryland re-warm-up protocol of explosive exercises significantly improved 100 m freestyle performance compared to a seated control (-0.68%, p=0.009), whereas a water protocol did not (p=0.234).
RCT (n=20)
Randomized
Does a dryland or water re-warm-up protocol improve 100 m freestyle performance in competitive swimmers compared to remaining seated?
A dryland explosive exercise re-warm-up protocol significantly improves 100 m freestyle sprint performance in competitive swimmers compared to remaining seated.
Effect estimate: -0.68% (dryland vs control)
p-value: p=0.009
The transition phase often causes athletes to lose the benefits of warm-up, so this study aimed to assess the effects of two re-warm-up protocols and a control condition without re-warm-up on 100 m freestyle performance and the kinematic variables (stroke length (SL), stroke rate (SR), and stroke index (SI)), subjective perception of effort (RPE), and physiological variables (heart rate (HR), temperature (T), and blood lactate concentration (La−)). Twenty competitive-level swimmers completed a dryland and water warm-up, followed by a 30 min transition phase and a 100 m freestyle simulation. Over 30 min, each swimmer randomly performed one of three re-warm-up protocols: control (remaining seated), dryland (explosive exercises), and water (race-pace series). The three experimental re-warm-up protocols affected 100 m freestyle performance (p = 0.019; η2p = 0.189). Post hoc comparisons showed that dryland was faster than control (−0.68%, p = 0.009), whereas no significant difference was observed between water and control (−0.52%, p = 0.234). No significant differences were observed between conditions for SR, SL, RPE, or La−, whereas peak HR was lower in the control. Although water did not significantly improve performance, swimmers reported more favourable sensations during the trial. In conclusion, the dryland protocol significantly improved 100 m freestyle performance, whereas the water protocol did not produce significant performance benefits under the present conditions.
Paiva et al. (Wed,) conducted a rct in Competitive-level swimmers (n=20). Dryland (explosive exercises) and water (race-pace series) re-warm-up protocols vs. Control (remaining seated) was evaluated on 100 m freestyle performance (-0.68% (dryland vs control), p=0.009). A dryland re-warm-up protocol of explosive exercises significantly improved 100 m freestyle performance compared to a seated control (-0.68%, p=0.009), whereas a water protocol did not (p=0.234).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: