Cross-sectional study analyzes anaerobic power and performance in elite Paralympic powerlifters, suggesting important training implications.
Background: Paralympic powerlifting requires high upper-limb force production within a short time frame, making anaerobic power a potentially relevant physiological component associated with competitive performance. This study aimed to analyze the associations between biodynamic variables and competitive performance in Paralympic powerlifting athletes. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 13 elite Paralympic powerlifters. Body composition was assessed using DXA. Arm isometric strength was measured by the handgrip test, dynamic strength by the medicine ball throw, and anaerobic power by an upper-limb-adapted Wingate test. Competitive performance was determined based on the official ranking position in the Brazilian Paralympic Powerlifting Championship. Results: Significant correlations were observed between all anaerobic power variables and competitive performance: relative mean power (r = −0.864; p < 0.001), mean power (r = −0.804; p = 0.003), relative peak power (r = −0.766; p = 0.006), and peak power (r = −0.791; p = 0.004). Additionally, total lean mass and left-hand grip strength showed significant associations with maximum competition lift in exploratory linear regression analyses. Conclusions: Upper-limb anaerobic power showed strong associations with competitive performance indicators in Paralympic powerlifting athletes. Furthermore, lean mass and upper-limb isometric strength showed significant associations with maximum competition lift, supporting the multifactorial nature of competitive performance in Paralympic powerlifting. These findings suggest the potential relevance of integrating power-, strength-, and body composition-oriented assessments and interventions into the training process of elite Paralympic powerlifters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carvalho et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: