INTRODUCTION
Postactivation performance enhancement (PAPE) is a warm-up strategy based on high-load and low-repetition resistance exercise that increases central nervous system excitability and the motor unit recruitment rate. High-intensity resistance exercise increases the responsiveness of alpha motor neurons, inducing rapid motor unit recruitment, and enhances cross-bridge interactions by increasing the calcium sensitivity of contractile proteins through phosphorylation of the myosin regulatory light chain (Reardon et al., 2014; Tillin and Bishop, 2009). This is utilized as an effective strategy to maximize the short-term explosive power and performance of elite athletes (Sanchez-Sanchez et al., 2018; Seitz and Haff, 2016).
For positive performance enhancement following PAPE, various factors such as exercise load, number of sets, and exercise type are considered, and among these, the establishment of an appropriate rest interval after the intervention is reported as a crucial element. Rest intervals are closely related to the recovery of depleted energy substrates; in particular, phosphocreatine, a primary energy source, is known to be substantially recovered starting from approximately 3 minutes after high-intensity exercise (Forbes et al., 2008; Hodgson et al., 2005). However, previous studies analyzing changes in exercise performance according to the rest interval still do not show consistent results, presenting limitations for field application (Wilson et al., 2013).
In previous studies related to rest intervals, Mitchell and Sale (2011) reported that countermovement jump performance was significantly increased after an 8-min rest (R8) compared to a 4-min rest following PAPE. On the other hand, Gouvêa et al. (2013) demonstrated that positive effects were observed in groups excluding 0–3 min and 16 min or more following PAPE, and Seitz et al. (2014) noted improvements in squat jump height after resting for 6, 9, and 12 min, excluding 3 min. As such, the applied rest intervals and their subsequent effects vary across studies, making it difficult to establish a clear consensus regarding the optimal rest interval for performance enhancement.
Most previous studies on PAPE have primarily focused on isolated measures of explosive power, such as jumping. However, explosive performance is effectively expressed when supported by skill-related physical fitness components, including agility, balance, and coordination (Bashir et al., 2019; Doğanay et al., 2020; Nesser et al., 2008). Despite this, limited research has investigated the effects of PAPE on skill-related physical fitness. Furthermore, few studies have simultaneously examined upper- and lower-body responses under different PAPE rest intervals in elite athletes. Therefore, this study investigated the effects of different rest intervals following PAPE on multiple components of upper- and lower-body skill-related physical fitness in elite athletes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participants
Participants were male elite athletes aged 20–29 years registered with the sports council, consisting of collegiate taekwondo, kendo, and badminton athletes who regularly participated in systematic sport-specific and resistance training. Inclusion criteria included at least 6 months of resistance training experience and no history of cardiovascular or musculoskeletal disorders within the past year. Sample size was estimated using G*Power (ver. 3.1.9.7; Heinrich Heine University, Germany). Based on an effect size of 0.55, an alpha level of 0.05, and statistical power of 0.80, the minimum required sample size was 6. Considering potential dropouts, 12 participants were initially recruited; however, 5 withdrew due to personal reasons. Therefore, data from seven participants were included in the final analysis. The study was approved by the institutional review board of Jeju National University (JJNU-IRB-2025-061), and all participants provided written informed consent. Participant characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Study design and procedures
This study employed a crossover design. Participants completed four experimental conditions in a randomized order: control (CON), 3-min rest (R3), R8, and 12-min rest (R12) groups following PAPE. A washout period of 72 hr was provided between each condition to minimize potential carryover effects. Prior to the experimental trials, participants completed three familiarization sessions over 1 week to minimize learning effects. All sessions were conducted under standardized laboratory conditions. All participants performed a standardized warm-up consisting of 5 min of light jogging prior to each experimental session. Performance testing was conducted after completion of the PAPE protocol and the assigned rest interval. Upper- and lower-body performance tests were conducted in separate sessions rather than simultaneously to minimize excessive fatigue and testing interference.
PAPE protocol
One-repetition maximum (1RM) for the bench press and squat was estimated using an indirect prediction equation to minimize injury risk, based on Saeidi et al. (2023). Participants performed a warm-up set at a load corresponding to 10–12 repetitions, followed by 1 min of rest. The load was progressively increased by 5%–10% for upper-body exercises and 10%–20% for lower-body exercises. Each set was performed for up to 10 repetitions with 3 min of rest between sets. The load was adjusted to identify the maximum weight that could be lifted for 7–8 repetitions. Estimated 1RM was calculated as follows: 1RM=W0+(W0×0.025×repetitions), where W0 represents the load lifted for 7–8 repetitions. In the PAPE conditions (the R3, R8, and R12 groups), participants performed additional warm-up sets at 50% and 70% of their estimated 1RM prior to the PAPE stimulus, followed by one set of five-repetition maximum (5RM) bench press and one set of 5RM squat. Upper- and lower-body exercises were performed separately. The CON group did not include these additional warm-up sets or the PAPE stimulus. All procedures were supervised by certified athletic trainers.
Rest intervals
Rest intervals following the PAPE protocol served as the primary independent variable in this study. Rest durations were set at 3, 8, or 12 min based on previous research (Gouvêa et al., 2013). Immediately after the PAPE protocol, participants remained seated and maintained passive rest for the assigned duration. Rest intervals were monitored using a stopwatch (OST-30W, CASIO, Japan).
Body composition
Participants visited the laboratory at 9:00 AM after maintaining an 8-hr fasting state to examine physique and body composition. After changing into light clothing excluding metallic objects, height was measured using an automatic weight and height scale (GL-310B, G-Tech International, Korea). Body composition was calculated using bioelectrical impedance analysis equipment (Inbody 270, Inbody, Korea) to determine weight, body fat mass, body mass index, percent body fat, and skeletal muscle mass.
Upper-body skill-related physical fitness
Upper-body power was assessed using the seated medicine ball throw. Participants sat with their backs against a wall and legs extended, and projected a 2-kg medicine ball (RSB-16054, Reebok, USA) from the chest as far as possible (Jones et al., 2017). Two trials were performed, and the mean distance was recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm. Upper-body agility was assessed using the Davies test, which has demonstrated acceptable reliability in previous studies (Heick et al., 2021; Riemann and Davies, 2023). Participants assumed a push-up position between two markers placed 90 cm apart and alternately touched each marker with the opposite hand for 15 sec. One familiarization trial was performed, followed by two recorded trials, and the mean value was used. Upper-body balance was evaluated using the Y-balance test kit (Move2Perform, USA), which has demonstrated acceptable reliability for assessing upper-quarter dynamic balance performance (Westrick et al., 2012). While maintaining a push-up position, participants reached in the medial, inferolateral, and superolateral directions with one hand. Reach distances were normalized to arm length and expressed as a percentage. Trials were repeated if balance was lost or the starting position was not maintained.
Lower-body skill-related physical fitness
Lower-body power was assessed using the sergeant jump with a digital jump meter (DW-771A, Daewoo Sports Industry, Korea). Participants performed maximal vertical jumps without a preparatory step. To minimize fatigue, approximately 2 min of rest was provided between trials. Two trials were performed, and the highest value was recorded in centimeters. Lower-body agility was assessed using the side-step test. Participants moved laterally between three markers placed 1.2 m apart for 20 sec (Kim, 2018). One familiarization trial was conducted prior to testing to minimize learning effects. Two trials were performed, and the mean number of repetitions was recorded. Lower-body balance was evaluated using the Y-balance test kit (Move2Perform), which has demonstrated reliability in previous studies (Plisky et al., 2009). Participants stood on one leg at the center platform and reached in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions with the contralateral limb. Each direction was measured 3 times, and the mean value was calculated. Reach distances were normalized to leg length and expressed as a percentage. Trials were repeated if balance was lost or the starting position was not maintained.
Whole-body skill-related physical fitness
Coordination was assessed using the alternate hand wall toss test with a tennis ball (Petrušič and Novak, 2024). Participants stood 2 m from a wall and alternately threw and caught the ball for 30 sec. In case of a dropped ball, participants immediately resumed the task using a spare ball. Two trials were performed, and the mean number of successful catches was recorded. Reaction time was measured using an auditory reaction time system (SEED Tech Co., Korea). Participants stood on the reaction mat and responded to an auditory signal by lifting both feet as quickly as possible. Three trials were performed, and the fastest response time was recorded to the nearest 0.001 sec. Speed was assessed using a 30-m sprint. Sprint times were measured using a stopwatch (OST-30W, CASIO). One maximal trial was performed, and the total sprint time was used for analysis.
Statistical analysis
All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 24.0 (IBM Co., USA). Data are presented as mean±standard deviation. Normality was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test. For normally distributed variables, a one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was conducted to examine differences between rest interval conditions. Mauchly test was used to assess sphericity, and the Greenhouse–Geisser correction was applied when necessary. Post hoc comparisons were performed using the least significant difference. Statistical significance was set at P< 0.05.
RESULTS
Changes in upper-body skill-related physical fitness by rest interval
As shown in Table 2, no significant main effects of rest intervals were observed for upper-body power or balance. However, a significant main effect of rest interval was observed for agility (F=8.513, P<0.001). Post hoc analysis revealed that performance in the R3 and R12 groups was significantly greater than in the CON group (P<0.05, respectively).
Changes in lower-body skill-related physical fitness by rest interval
As shown in Table 3, no significant differences were observed in agility across rest intervals. In contrast, a significant main effect of rest interval was found for power (F=4.367, P<0.05), with the R3 and R12 groups showing significantly greater performance than the CON group (P<0.05, respectively). Also, significant main effects of rest interval were observed for balance in both the left (F=6.029, P<0.01) and right legs (F=6.000, P<0.01). Post hoc analysis indicated that, for the left leg, performance in the R3 group was significantly greater than in both the CON and R12 groups (P<0.05, respectively). For the right leg, the R3 group was significantly greater than the CON (P<0.01) and R12 (P< 0.05) groups, while the R8 group was also greater than the CON group (P<0.05).
Changes in whole-body skill-related physical fitness by rest interval
As shown in Table 4, rest intervals partially influenced whole-body skill-related physical fitness. No significant main effects of rest interval were found for auditory reaction time or 30 m sprint performance. In contrast, significant main effects of rest interval were observed for coordination in both the upper body (F=3.711, P<0.05) and lower body (F=6.855, P<0.01). Post hoc analysis revealed that, for the upper body, performance in the R3 group was significantly greater than in the CON group (P<0.01). For the lower body, performance in the R3 (P<0.001), R8 (P<0.05), and R12 (P<0.05) groups was significantly greater than in the CON group.
DISCUSSION
Although PAPE is widely used as a performance-enhancing strategy, its effects remain inconclusive due to conflicting findings regarding optimal recovery duration. Moreover, previous research has predominantly focused on isolated power performance, with limited attention to multiple skill-related fitness components. Therefore, this study examined the effects of different rest intervals following PAPE on upper- and lower-body performance in elite athletes.
Following upper-body PAPE, no significant changes were observed in power and dynamic balance, whereas agility was improved under specific rest conditions. Previous studies using bench press-based PAPE protocols have shown limited or negative effects on upper-body explosive performance. Farup and Sørensen (2010) reported that explosive performance significantly decreased following isometric bench press at rest intervals of 2, 10, and 20 min. In addition, Ferreira et al. (2012) found no significant improvements in explosive performance after six-repetition maximum bench press with rest intervals of 1, 3, and 5 min. These findings partially support the present results. This lack of improvement may be partially attributed to fatigue in synergistic muscles, including the triceps brachii and serratus anterior, limiting acute force production (Muyor et al., 2019; Norwood et al., 2007). In addition, upper-body explosive performance may be more sensitive to the balance between potentiation and fatigue, and acute fatigue induced by high-intensity resistance exercise may have partially offset the potential benefits of PAPE. Similarly, no significant changes were observed in dynamic balance, likely due to its reliance on complex neuromuscular and sensory integration (Wang et al., 2015).
In contrast, agility was significantly improved in the R3 and R12 groups compared to the CON group. Although direct evidence regarding PAPE and agility is limited, this improvement may be associated with increased neural activation and neuromuscular efficiency, as well as elevated muscle temperature facilitating faster contraction and relaxation in the skeletal muscle fibers (Racinais et al., 2017; Sekulic et al., 2013).
Following lower-body PAPE, no significant changes were observed in agility. These findings are partially consistent with Marshall et al. (2019), who reported no significant differences in agility across various rest intervals following PAPE. This may be attributed to the multifactorial nature of agility, which involves the ability to rapidly respond to external stimuli and requires the integration of multiple physical components, including speed, change of direction, coordination, strength, and flexibility (Sekulic et al., 2013).
In contrast, significant improvements were observed in power and dynamic balance of lower-body. Power was significantly increased in the R3 group compared to the CON group. Guo et al. (2022) reported improved explosive performance following a three-repetition maximum squat with 3 and 6 min rest intervals, and Seitz et al. (2014) also demonstrated enhanced jump performance across 3- to 12-min recovery periods following PAPE. These findings are consistent with the present results. The improvements in the R3 group following lower-body PAPE may be partially related to potentiation-induced increases in tendon stiffness, which may enhance force transmission and thereby contribute to acute improvements in power. Improvements in dynamic balance may be related to enhanced neuromuscular control and trunk stability following lower-body PAPE, as activation of the lumbopelvic-hip complex and neuromuscular regulation are critical for maintaining dynamic balance (Benis et al., 2016; Pożarowszczyk et al., 2018; Saeterbakken et al., 2022).
Following both upper- and lower-body PAPE, no significant changes were observed in speed. While resistance training such as the squat exercise is widely recommended to improve sprint performance, the present findings suggest that a single bout of high-intensity resistance-based PAPE may be insufficient to elicit such improvements (Huang et al., 2024). Sprint performance is influenced not only by force production capacity, but also by technical and biomechanical factors such as stride length, stride frequency, and intermuscular coordination. Therefore, these multifactorial characteristics of sprint performance may not be substantially altered following a single bout of PAPE.
Similarly, no significant differences in reaction time were observed across all conditions. Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings depending on the type of stimulus applied. Improvements in reaction time have been observed when combined visual and auditory stimuli were used following high-intensity resistance exercise, whereas no significant changes were found when a single sensory modality, such as auditory stimuli alone, was applied (Genç et al., 2025). These findings are consistent with the present results and may suggest that acute PAPE effects are less likely to influence simple auditory reaction tasks. In addition, reaction time performance may involve multiple sensory and cognitive processes that are not substantially altered following a single bout of PAPE (Colonius and Diederich, 2004).
In contrast, coordination significantly improved in the R3 group compared to the CON group in both upper- and lower-body PAPE conditions. This may be partially associated with enhanced neuromuscular control and increased activation of core musculature following resistance exercise. Previous studies have suggested that resistance exercise stimulates proprioceptive inputs, including muscle spindles and Golgi tendon organs, as well as vestibular and visual systems, thereby facilitating neuromuscular regulation involved in coordination and postural control (Piper et al., 2012). In addition, exercises such as the bench press and squat increase activation of LPHC (lumbar, pelvic, hip complex) muscles, contributing to improved stability and movement efficiency of human body (Piper et al., 2012; Saeterbakken et al., 2022).
These findings suggest that PAPE-induced responses in skill-related physical fitness may differ according to body region and performance task. In addition, the improvements observed under the R3 condition suggest that relatively short recovery intervals may be beneficial for selected aspects of acute performance rather than universally effective across all variables. However, the absence of direct physiological measurements limits mechanistic interpretation. Despite this, the present study provides a comprehensive evaluation of PAPE effects across upper- and lower-body performance, offering preliminary evidence that may help inform evidence-based warm-up strategies.
PDF Links
PubReader
ePub Link
XML Download
Full text via DOI
Download Citation 
Print 
