The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of ingesting either a high glycaemic index (HGI) or low glycaemic index (LGI) carbohydrate meal (preceding a 12 h overnight fast and where the meal was ingested 45-min prior to activity) on intermittent sprint and endurance exercise performance. Ten male varsity athletes from intermittent sports (age 23.6 ± 1.7 years, VO2max 51.9 ± 4.7 mL·kg−1·min−1) underwent a peak velocity (Vpeak) test and familiarisation session, followed by two experimental sessions in random order. Experimental sessions involved the ingestion of either an HGI or LGI meal, followed by the completion of the modified Loughborough Intermittent Shuttle Test (mLIST). There was no significant difference between HGI or LGI meals on sprint times (p = 0.62) and distance to exhaustion (p = 0.54) in the mLIST. Exercise heart rate, blood lactate and ratings of perceived exertion were also similar between the two meal trials throughout the mLIST (all p > 0.05). Subjective ratings of hunger, fullness, satiety and satisfaction were also not significantly different between the two meals. In conclusion, consuming either an HGI or LGI meal after a prolonged 12 h fast and ingesting the meal 45 min prior to exercise did not differ in either physiological, subjective and intermittent sprint and endurance performance outcomes.

Background The implementation of blood flow restriction (BFR) during exercise is becoming an increasingly useful adjunct method in both athletic and rehabilitative settings. Advantages in pairing BFR with training can be observed in two scenarios: (1) training at lower absolute intensities (e.g. walking) elicits adaptations akin to high-intensity sessions (e.g. running intervals); (2) when performing exercise at moderate to high intensities, higher physiological stimulus may be attained, leading to larger improvements in aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular parameters. The former has been well documented in recent systematic reviews, but consensus on BFR (concomitant or post-exercise) combined with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) protocols is not well established. Therefore, this systematic review evaluates the acute and chronic effects of BFR + HIIT. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to identify relevant studies. A systematic search on 1 February 2022, was conducted on four key databases: ScienceDirect, PubMed, Scopus and SPORTDiscus. Quality of each individual study was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Extraction of data from included studies was conducted using an adapted version of the 'Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome' (PICO) framework. Results A total of 208 articles were identified, 18 of which met inclusion criteria. Of the 18 BFR + HIIT studies (244 subjects), 1 reported both acute and chronic effects, 5 examined acute responses and 12 investigated chronic effects. Acutely, BFR challenges the metabolic processes (vascular and oxygenation responses) during high-intensity repeated sprint exercise—which accelerates central and peripheral neuromuscular fatigue mechanisms resulting in performance impairments. Analysis of the literature exploring the chronic effects of BFR + HIIT suggests that BFR does provide an additive physiological training stimulus to HIIT protocols, especially for measured aerobic, muscular, and, to some extent, anaerobic parameters. Conclusion Presently, it appears that the addition of BFR into HIIT enhances physiological improvements in aerobic, muscular, and, to some extent, anaerobic performance. However due to large variability in permutations of BFR + HIIT methodologies, it is necessary for future research to explore and recommend standardised BFR guidelines for each HIIT exercise type.

In badminton, power production can be enhanced through the fundamental practice of a dynamic warm-up with resistance conditioning activity to induce a post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) effect. The use of heavy resistance exercise in the form of heavy weights to induce PAPE during competition is not logistically practical in the badminton arena. Thus, there is a need to investigate the use of easily available alternative preconditioning stimuli to induce a similar potentiating effect in badminton-specific performance. This study adopted a repeated-measures design of three warm-up conditions: control (CON), weighted wearable resistance (WWR), and resistance band variable resistance (BVR). Fourteen badminton players from the national training squad (11 males, 3 females, age 18 ± 1 y) completed the experimental sessions in random order. Change of direction speed (CODS) and smash velocity (SV) tests were performed at five timepoints—baseline test after the warm-up and at the end of each of the four exercise blocks of a simulated match play protocol. CODS was significantly faster under the two resistance warm-up conditions (WWR and BVR) compared to the CON condition at baseline (−0.2 s ± 0.39 and −0.2 s ± 0.46, p = 0.001 and 0.03, g = 0.47 and 0.40, respectively), but there were no differences at the other timepoints (all p > 0.05). SV was significantly faster for all the four exercise blocks than at baseline under all three warm-up conditions (p = 0.02), but there were no differences in SV between the three warm-up conditions across all the five measured timepoints (p = 0.15). In conclusion, implementing resistance (~10% body weight) in sport-specific plyometric exercises using WWR or BVR during warm-up routines may induce PAPE effects on the change of direction speed but not smash velocity, in well-trained badminton players, as compared with the same warm-up exercises using bodyweight (i.e., CON condition). The positive effects of CODS were, however, observed only at the start of the match and possibly lasted for up to between 5 and 10 min of match play.