Neuromuscular PerformanceNCT07789470
Acute Effects of Vibration Versus High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning on Neuromuscular Performance
A study testing High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning and Vibration Conditioning in people with Neuromuscular Performance, run by Namik Kemal University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
The purpose of this randomized crossover study was to compare the immediate effects of high-intensity resistance conditioning and whole-body vibration conditioning on lower- and upper-body neuromuscular performance in recreationally resistance-trained young adults. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 17 to 25 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Neuromuscular Performance
- What is being tested?
- High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning and Vibration Conditioning
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 10 Nov 2025to 20 Nov 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 17 to 25 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 17 to 25 years
- Enrolled as a student in the Faculty of Sport Sciences at Tekirdag Namik Kemal University
- Recreational participation in resistance training
- Previous sporting experience
- Provision of written informed consent
- For participants younger than 18 years, provision of additional written consent from a parent
Who cannot join
- An orthopedic condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
- A cardiovascular condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
- A neurological condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Tekirdag Namik Kemal University, Sports Sciences Research and Development Centre, Tekirdag, Suleymanpasa 59030
Tekirdağ, Suleymanpasa, 59030
About this study
Official title: Acute Effects of Vibration Versus High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning on Lower- and Upper-Body Neuromuscular Performance: A Randomized Crossover Study
The purpose of this randomized crossover study was to compare the immediate effects of high-intensity resistance conditioning and whole-body vibration conditioning on lower- and upper-body neuromuscular performance in recreationally resistance-trained young adults.
Twenty participants were enrolled, and 19 completed both experimental conditions. After a preliminary assessment and familiarization session, participants completed the resistance-conditioning and vibration-conditioning protocols in a randomized order during two experimental sessions separated by 24 hours.
Read more
The resistance-conditioning protocol included three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum before countermovement jump testing and three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum before an isometric push-up assessment. The vibration-conditioning protocol included lower- and upper-body vibration exercises performed on a vibration platform before the corresponding performance assessments.
Lower-body performance was assessed using countermovement jump height, flight time-to-contraction time ratio, and relative peak power. Upper-body performance was assessed using peak force during an isometric push-up. All performance outcomes were measured using dual force desks.
Read the detailed description
Acute conditioning activities are commonly included in pre-performance routines to influence subsequent force- and power-related performance. High-intensity resistance exercise and whole-body vibration represent mechanically different conditioning strategies, but direct comparisons of their immediate effects, particularly across both lower- and upper-body outcomes in the same participants, remain limited.
This study used a randomized, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover design. Twenty recreationally resistance-trained students from the Faculty of Sport Sciences were enrolled. One participant withdrew during preliminary testing and did not proceed to the experimental crossover sessions. The remaining 19 participants completed both conditioning conditions. Participants were assigned to either a resistance-conditioning followed by vibration-conditioning sequence or a vibration-conditioning followed by resistance-conditioning sequence using a computer-generated random-number sequence.
The study included one preliminary assessment session and two experimental sessions. During the preliminary session, demographic and training-history information, anthropometric and body-composition measurements, estimated squat and bench-press one-repetition maximum values, familiarization trials, and a common pre-experimental performance assessment were completed. A 48-hour recovery interval was provided between the preliminary session and the first experimental session. The two experimental sessions were separated by 24 hours.
During the high-intensity resistance-conditioning condition, participants performed three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. After 9 minutes of passive recovery, countermovement jump performance was assessed. Following the jump assessment, participants rested for 15 minutes and then performed three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after the bench-press conditioning activity.
During the vibration-conditioning condition, participants completed four 30-second lower-body vibration bouts at 28 Hz and 4 mm displacement, with 30 seconds of passive recovery between bouts. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 5 minutes of recovery. Following the jump assessment and a 7-minute passive recovery period, participants completed two 30-second upper-body vibration bouts using extended- and flexed-elbow push-up positions. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after completion of the upper-body vibration protocol.
The four primary outcomes were countermovement jump height, flight time-to-contraction time ratio, relative peak power, and isometric push-up peak force. Outcomes were obtained using a dual force-plate system. The common pre-experimental assessment was used descriptively because it was performed once before both crossover conditions and was not a period-specific baseline. The primary comparison evaluated the period-adjusted within-participant difference between the complete resistance-conditioning and vibration-conditioning protocols.
- Conditions
- Neuromuscular Performance
- Being tested
- High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning, Vibration Conditioning
- Keywords
- Whole-Body Vibration, High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning, Post-Activation Performance Enhancement, Countermovement Jump, Isometric Push-Up, Acute Conditioning
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
High-Intensity Resistance ConditioningOther
Participants performed three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 9 minutes of passive recovery. Following the jump assessment and 15 minutes of passive recovery, participants performed three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after the bench-press conditioning activity.
Vibration ConditioningOther
Participants completed four 30-second lower-body vibration bouts at 28 Hz and 4 mm displacement, with 30 seconds of passive recovery between bouts. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 5 minutes of recovery. Following the jump assessment and 7 minutes of passive recovery, participants completed two 30-second upper-body vibration bouts using extended- and flexed-elbow push-up positions. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after completion of the upper-body vibration protocol.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance Conditioning Followed by Vibration Conditioning | Experimental | Participants completed the high-intensity resistance-conditioning protocol during Period 1 and the vibration-conditioning protocol during Period 2. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours. Receives: Other: High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning; Other: Vibration Conditioning |
| Vibration Conditioning Followed by Resistance Conditioning | Experimental | Participants completed the vibration-conditioning protocol during Period 1 and the high-intensity resistance-conditioning protocol during Period 2. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours. Receives: Other: High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning; Other: Vibration Conditioning |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Countermovement Jump Height
Countermovement jump height was measured in centimeters using a dual force-plate system (ForceDecks, VALD Performance). Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the highest valid jump was retained for analysis. Higher values indicate greater jump height.
Measured: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
Countermovement Jump Flight Time-to-Contraction Time Ratio
The flight time-to-contraction time ratio was obtained from the countermovement jump force-time data using ForceDecks software. Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the value from the highest valid jump was retained for analysis. The ratio is dimensionless.
Measured: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
Countermovement Jump Relative Peak Power
Relative peak power during the countermovement jump was measured in watts per kilogram using a dual force-plate system and calculated by ForceDecks software. Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the value from the highest valid jump was retained for analysis.
Measured: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
Isometric Push-Up Peak Force
Peak vertical ground-reaction force during an isometric push-up was measured in newtons using a dual force-plate system (ForceDecks, VALD Performance). Participants completed two to three maximal attempts, and the highest valid force value was retained for analysis.
Measured: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after bench-press resistance conditioning and 9 minutes after upper-body vibration conditioning
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Aug 2026
- Study start10 Nov 2025
- Primary completion20 Nov 2025
- Study completion20 Nov 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Neuromuscular PerformanceStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- This study used a randomized, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover design. Participants were randomized to either a resistance-conditioning followed by vibration-conditioning sequence or a vibration-conditioning followed by resistance-conditioning sequence. Each participant completing the crossover phase received both conditioning protocols. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Namik Kemal University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, umut canlı, Namik Kemal University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07789470
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- TNKU-2024.315.11.22
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 23 Aug 2026
- Last updated
- 27 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data underlying the results reported in the publication will be made available upon reasonable request. No directly identifying participant information will be shared.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Acute Effects of Vibration Versus High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning on Lower- and Upper-Body Neuromuscular Performance: A Randomized Crossover Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07789470
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TNKU-2024.315.11.22
- Conditions
- Neuromuscular Performance
- Keywords
- Whole-Body Vibration, High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning, Post-Activation Performance Enhancement, Countermovement Jump, Isometric Push-Up, Acute Conditioning
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Namik Kemal UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 20 Nov 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Aug 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this randomized crossover study was to compare the immediate effects of high-intensity resistance conditioning and whole-body vibration conditioning on lower- and upper-body neuromuscular performance in recreationally resistance-trained young adults.
Twenty participants were enrolled, and 19 completed both experimental conditions. After a preliminary assessment and familiarization session, participants completed the resistance-conditioning and vibration-conditioning protocols in a randomized order during two experimental sessions separated by 24 hours.
The resistance-conditioning protocol included three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum before countermovement jump testing and three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum before an isometric push-up assessment. The vibration-conditioning protocol included lower- and upper-body vibration exercises performed on a vibration platform before the corresponding performance assessments.
Lower-body performance was assessed using countermovement jump height, flight time-to-contraction time ratio, and relative peak power. Upper-body performance was assessed using peak force during an isometric push-up. All performance outcomes were measured using dual force desks.
Detailed description
Acute conditioning activities are commonly included in pre-performance routines to influence subsequent force- and power-related performance. High-intensity resistance exercise and whole-body vibration represent mechanically different conditioning strategies, but direct comparisons of their immediate effects, particularly across both lower- and upper-body outcomes in the same participants, remain limited.
This study used a randomized, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover design. Twenty recreationally resistance-trained students from the Faculty of Sport Sciences were enrolled. One participant withdrew during preliminary testing and did not proceed to the experimental crossover sessions. The remaining 19 participants completed both conditioning conditions. Participants were assigned to either a resistance-conditioning followed by vibration-conditioning sequence or a vibration-conditioning followed by resistance-conditioning sequence using a computer-generated random-number sequence.
The study included one preliminary assessment session and two experimental sessions. During the preliminary session, demographic and training-history information, anthropometric and body-composition measurements, estimated squat and bench-press one-repetition maximum values, familiarization trials, and a common pre-experimental performance assessment were completed. A 48-hour recovery interval was provided between the preliminary session and the first experimental session. The two experimental sessions were separated by 24 hours.
During the high-intensity resistance-conditioning condition, participants performed three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. After 9 minutes of passive recovery, countermovement jump performance was assessed. Following the jump assessment, participants rested for 15 minutes and then performed three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after the bench-press conditioning activity.
During the vibration-conditioning condition, participants completed four 30-second lower-body vibration bouts at 28 Hz and 4 mm displacement, with 30 seconds of passive recovery between bouts. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 5 minutes of recovery. Following the jump assessment and a 7-minute passive recovery period, participants completed two 30-second upper-body vibration bouts using extended- and flexed-elbow push-up positions. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after completion of the upper-body vibration protocol.
The four primary outcomes were countermovement jump height, flight time-to-contraction time ratio, relative peak power, and isometric push-up peak force. Outcomes were obtained using a dual force-plate system. The common pre-experimental assessment was used descriptively because it was performed once before both crossover conditions and was not a period-specific baseline. The primary comparison evaluated the period-adjusted within-participant difference between the complete resistance-conditioning and vibration-conditioning protocols.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study used a randomized, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover design. Participants were randomized to either a resistance-conditioning followed by vibration-conditioning sequence or a vibration-conditioning followed by resistance-conditioning sequence. Each participant completing the crossover phase received both conditioning protocols. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance Conditioning Followed by Vibration Conditioning | Experimental | Other: High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning, Other: Vibration ConditioningParticipants completed the high-intensity resistance-conditioning protocol during Period 1 and the vibration-conditioning protocol during Period 2. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours. |
| Vibration Conditioning Followed by Resistance Conditioning | Experimental | Other: High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning, Other: Vibration ConditioningParticipants completed the vibration-conditioning protocol during Period 1 and the high-intensity resistance-conditioning protocol during Period 2. The two experimental periods were separated by 24 hours. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 17 to 25 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Aged 17 to 25 years
- Enrolled as a student in the Faculty of Sport Sciences at Tekirdag Namik Kemal University
- Recreational participation in resistance training
- Previous sporting experience
- Provision of written informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- An orthopedic condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
- A cardiovascular condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
- A neurological condition that could interfere with the exercise or testing procedures
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| High-Intensity Resistance ConditioningParticipants performed three squat repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 9 minutes of passive recovery. Following the jump assessment and 15 minutes of passive recovery, participants performed three bench-press repetitions at 90% of estimated one-repetition maximum. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after the bench-press conditioning activity. | Other | Resistance Conditioning Followed by Vibration Conditioning, Vibration Conditioning Followed by Resistance Conditioning |
| Vibration ConditioningParticipants completed four 30-second lower-body vibration bouts at 28 Hz and 4 mm displacement, with 30 seconds of passive recovery between bouts. Countermovement jump performance was assessed after 5 minutes of recovery. Following the jump assessment and 7 minutes of passive recovery, participants completed two 30-second upper-body vibration bouts using extended- and flexed-elbow push-up positions. Isometric push-up performance was assessed 9 minutes after completion of the upper-body vibration protocol. | Other | Resistance Conditioning Followed by Vibration Conditioning, Vibration Conditioning Followed by Resistance Conditioning |
Primary outcome
Countermovement Jump Height
Time frame: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
Countermovement jump height was measured in centimeters using a dual force-plate system (ForceDecks, VALD Performance). Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the highest valid jump was retained for analysis. Higher values indicate greater jump height.
Countermovement Jump Flight Time-to-Contraction Time Ratio
Time frame: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
The flight time-to-contraction time ratio was obtained from the countermovement jump force-time data using ForceDecks software. Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the value from the highest valid jump was retained for analysis. The ratio is dimensionless.
Countermovement Jump Relative Peak Power
Time frame: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning
Relative peak power during the countermovement jump was measured in watts per kilogram using a dual force-plate system and calculated by ForceDecks software. Participants completed at least three valid trials, and the value from the highest valid jump was retained for analysis.
Isometric Push-Up Peak Force
Time frame: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after bench-press resistance conditioning and 9 minutes after upper-body vibration conditioning
Peak vertical ground-reaction force during an isometric push-up was measured in newtons using a dual force-plate system (ForceDecks, VALD Performance). Participants completed two to three maximal attempts, and the highest valid force value was retained for analysis.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Aug 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data underlying the results reported in the publication will be made available upon reasonable request. No directly identifying participant information will be shared.
Related trials for Neuromuscular Performance
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Virtual Reality Exergaming on Reaction Time, Physical Performance, and Muscle Activity in Children
Neuromuscular Performance, Reaction Time
Recruiting
Acute Power Training Effects in Older Adults
Muscle Power, Functional Performance
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Different Sled Loads on Sprint and Neuromuscular Performance in Young Male Football Players: An 8-Week Periodized Field Study
Athletic Performance, Neuromuscular Adaptations
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Neuromuscular Function and Performance in Artistic Jump Rope Athletes
Neuromuscular Function, Athletic Performance Enhancement
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Neuromotor-Cognitive Training on Performance Dancers
Postural Balance, Reaction Time
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing High-Intensity Resistance Conditioning and Vibration Conditioning in people with Neuromuscular Performance, run by Namik Kemal University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Countermovement Jump Height (time frame: At each experimental period: 9 minutes after squat resistance conditioning and 5 minutes after lower-body vibration conditioning). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Aug 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.