Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 4;18(16):8270. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168270

Table 3.

Changes in Performance and Asymmetries After Unilateral Eccentric Overload Training With Different Strategies.

SVW = SAME VOLUME, WEAKER LEG (n = 10) DVW = DOUBLE VOLUME, WEAKER LEG (n = 11) SVS = SAME VOLUME, STRONGER LEG (n = 14)
Variables PRE-TEST POST-TEST ES (CL90%) p PRE-TEST POST-TEST ES (CL90%) p PRE-TEST POST-TEST ES (CL90%) p
ConMean stronger (W) 439.30 (±169.02) 747.22 (±203.79) 1.49 (1.1; 1.87) <0.01 493.06 (±211.14) 807.29 (±200.33) 1.07 (0.64; 1.5) <0.01 427.44 (±124.88) 648.45 (±178.59) 1.16 (0.81; 1.5) <0.01
ConMean weaker (W) 306.91 (±202.13) 748.46 (±214.19) 2.24 (1.74; 2.74) <0.01 358.72 (±211.22) 796.37 (±191.34) 2.04 (1.45; 2.64) <0.01 339.79 (±138.56) 636.84 (±166.9) 1.53 (1.22; 1.85) <0.01
ConMean asymmetry (%) 32.9 (±37.08) 7.84 (±5.38) 0.89 (0.19; 1.58) 0.04 32.56 (±36.35) 13.7 (±9.99) 0.43 (−0.15; 1.01) 0.18 20.74 (±24.85) 12.23 (±9.56) 0.45 (−0.31; 1.2) 0.54
EccMean stronger (W) 404.36 (±146.44) 669.52 (±176.23) 1.52 (1.15; 1.9) <0.01 456.18 (±161.17) 705.89 (±165.03) 1.17 (0.71; 1.63) <0.01 391.96 (±114.86) 577.28 (±154.35) 1.00 (0.71; 1.29) <0.01
EccMean weaker (W) 344.28 (±138.17) 667.14 (±178.9) 1.97 (1.53; 2.4) <0.01 443.38 (±165.13) 656.93 (±131.9) 1.08 (0.71; 1.45) <0.01 367.91 (±114.39) 581.17 (±148) 1.16 (0.85; 1.47) <0.01
EccMean asymmetry (%) 26.78 (±29.57) 11.43 (±6.36) 0.81 (−0.03; 1.65) 0.19 19.61 (±16.58) 13.65 (±6.23) 0.01 (−1.02; 1.04) 0.27 14.12 (±7.87) 9.37 (±9.25) 0.63 (−0.02; 1.28) 0.24
ConPeak stronger (W) 788.95 (±307.85) 1167.04 (±250.03) 1.14 (0.68; 1.61) <0.01 916.66 (±434.15) 1348.97 (±322.06) 0.92 (0.43; 1.4) <0.01 717.06 (±195.93) 1085.83 (±347.05) 1.25 (0.83; 1.67) <0.01
ConPeak weaker (W) 669.49 (±313.97) 1217.9 (±302.24) 1.63 (1.13; 2.14) <0.01 872.23 (±447.98) 1176.24 (±209.55) 0.77 (0.33; 1.21) 0.03 667.53 (±192.14) 1072.01 (±368.35) 1.33 (0.95; 1.71) <0.01
ConPeak asymmetry (%) 32.02 (±28.36) 6.47 (±4.94) 1.6 (0.78; 2.41) 0.01 20.63 (±16.33) 16.43 (±11.28) 0.07 (−0.81; 0.94) 0.45 13.68 (±9.21) 10.49 (±8.98) 0.39 (−0.28; 1.06) 0.44
EccPeak stronger (W) 938.72 (±427.89) 1581.07 (±418.54) 1.31 (0.77; 1.86) <0.01 1034.55 (±436.39) 1645.6 (±421.01) 1.12 (0.68; 1.57) <0.01 850.57 (±297.64) 1311.17 (±466.67) 1.08 (0.71; 1.45) <0.01
EccPeak weaker (W) 834.25 (±397.72) 1560.83 (±522.17) 1.64 (1.18; 2.09) <0.01 1010.49 (±450.81) 1583.75 (±334.42) 1.11 (0.72; 1.5) <0.01 812.37 (±311.59) 1311.07 (±451.86) 1.19 (0.83; 1.56) <0.01
EccPeak asymmetry (%) 27.32 (±29.6) 14.36 (±11.17) 0.34 (−0.46; 1.13) 0.39 20.46 (±12.81) 12.2 (±10.4) 0.68 (0.09; 1.27) 0.11 13.32 (±11.39) 12.6 (±10.67) 0.08 (−0.66; 0.82) 0.89

Note: ConMean, mean concentric power output; EccMean, mean eccentric power; ConPeak, maximal peak concentric power output; EccPeak, maximal peak eccentric power output; ES, effect size; CL, confidence limit; SVW, unilateral eccentric overload training in the lateral squat performing the same volume with both limbs starting with the weaker limb; DVW, unilateral eccentric overload training in the lateral squat performing the double volume with the weaker limb starting with the weaker limb; SVS, unilateral eccentric overload training in the lateral squat performing the same volume with both limbs starting with the stronger limb. All results are presented in the same direction; that is, a positive change is considered an improvement, while a negative change is considered an impairment.