Krzysztofik · Frontiers in physiology 2020 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=11 studies (174 participants)

Post-activation Performance Enhancement in the Bench Press Throw: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental trials

PubMed 33519506 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2020.598628 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis of MEDLINE, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus databases through August 2020 evaluated the post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) effect on bench press throw (BPT) performance. The meta-analysis included 11 studies with a total of 174 resistance-trained men (age 25.2 ± 2.1 years; bench press relative strength 1.31 ± 0.14 kg/kg). Standardized mean effect sizes (ES) between pre- and post-conditioning activity (CA) were analyzed using a random-effects model across varying CA types, intensities, set numbers, and rest intervals.

What was found

The overall PAPE effect in the BPT was small (ES = 0.33, p < 0.01). - Bench press CA at 60–84% 1RM yielded ES = 0.43, compared to ballistic-plyometrics (ES = 0.29), bench press at ≥85% 1RM (ES = 0.23), bench press at >100% 1RM (ES = 0.22), and concentric-only bench press (ES = 0.11). - A single CA set produced greater effects (ES = 0.37) than multiple sets (ES = 0.29). - For CA intensity <85% 1RM, a 5–7 min rest interval yielded ES = 0.48, versus ES = 0.40 for 0.15–4 min and ES = 0.36 for ≥8 min. - For CA intensity ≥85% 1RM, a 5–7 min rest yielded ES = 0.30 and ≥8 min yielded ES = 0.29, while 0.15–4 min impaired performance (ES = -0.13).

Why it matters

The findings define specific conditioning parameters—namely a single set of moderate-load bench press followed by 5–7 minutes of rest—to acutely enhance upper-body ballistic power output in resistance-trained athletes.

Limits

The total sample size was small (174 participants across 11 studies) and exclusively composed of young resistance-trained men, precluding generalization to women, elite athletes, or untrained populations. The abstract provides no assessment of publication bias, heterogeneity metrics, or the duration of enhanced performance beyond immediate post-test windows.

Cited by