Passive heating following the prematch warm-up in soccer: examining the time-course of changes in muscle temperature and contractile function

Abstract

This study examined changes in muscle temperature, electrically evoked muscle contractile properties, and voluntary power before and after a soccer specific active warm‐up and subsequent rest period. Ten amateur soccer players performed two experimental sessions that involved performance of a modified FIFA 11+ soccer specific warm‐up, followed by a 12.5‐min rest period where participants were required to wear either normal clothing or a passive electrical heating garment was applied to the upper thigh muscles. Assessments around the warm‐up and cool‐down included measures of maximal torque, rate of torque development, muscle temperature (T m), and electrically evoked measures of quadriceps contractile function. T m was increased after the warm‐up by 3.2 ± 0.7°C (P < 0.001). Voluntary and evoked rates of torque development increased after the warm‐up between 20% and 30% (P < 0.05), despite declines in both maximal voluntary torque and voluntary activation (P < 0.05). Application of a passive heating garment in the cool‐down period after the warm‐up did not effect variables measured. While T m was reduced by 1.4 ± 0.4°C after the rest period (P < 0.001), this value was still higher than pre warm‐up levels. Voluntary and evoked rate of torque development remained elevated from pre warm‐up levels at the end of the cool‐down (P < 0.05). The soccer specific warm‐up elevated muscle temperature by 3.2°C and was associated with concomitant increases of between 20% and 30% in voluntary rate of torque development, which seems explained by elevations in rate‐dependent measures of intrinsic muscle contractile function. Application of a passive heating garment did not attenuate declines in muscle temperature during a 12.5‐min rest period.

Effects of warm‐up on hamstring muscles stiffness: Cycling vs foam rolling

“…The greater magnitude of shear modulus changes observed after cycling suggests the significance of temperature-mediated warm-up mechanisms on muscle stiffness and contractile properties. 14,15 Voluntary muscle activity during ten to fifteen minutes of cycling 8 or running 20 is known to acutely elevate muscle temperature by 3-4°C. Although conflicting evidence has been reported in the literature, 20 muscle temperature is known to affect the stiffness of biological tissues in vitro.…”

“…Nevertheless, sport-specific warm-up routines usually involve both active and passive tasks. 14,15 Active 7 or passive muscle heating 2 may help to maximize the effects of subsequent passive tasks (ie, passive stretching, massage) on muscle stiffness and ROM. Furthermore, given that mechanical movement may affect muscle thixotropy (without significant increase in muscle temperature), 6,9 additional effects could be expected when an active warm-up activity precedes a passive task.…”

“…19 Alternatively, the effects of warm-up tasks on the relationship between passive torque and joint angle have been examined to evaluate changes in musculo-articular stiffness, with some discrepancies. 7,14,15,20 However, the torque-angle relationship evaluates the stiffness of both muscular (ie, agonists and antagonists) and non-muscular structures (ie, tendon, nerve, skin, joints). 21 Hence, this method does not allow for precise and direct assessment of muscle stiffness, which may account for the conflicting evidence.…”

“…On the other hand, other studies have shown greater ROM increments following static stretching compared with active warm‐up tasks. Nevertheless, sport‐specific warm‐up routines usually involve both active and passive tasks . Active or passive muscle heating may help to maximize the effects of subsequent passive tasks (ie, passive stretching, massage) on muscle stiffness and ROM.…”

“…Consequently, significant changes in maximal ROM do not necessarily denote changes in muscle stiffness . Alternatively, the effects of warm‐up tasks on the relationship between passive torque and joint angle have been examined to evaluate changes in musculo‐articular stiffness, with some discrepancies . However, the torque‐angle relationship evaluates the stiffness of both muscular (ie, agonists and antagonists) and non‐muscular structures (ie, tendon, nerve, skin, joints) .…”