The present paper endeavored to elucidate the topic on the effects of morning versus evening resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy by conducting a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies that examined time of day-specific resistance training. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines with searches conducted through PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases. The Downs and Black checklist was used for the assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies. Studies that examined the effects of time of day-specific resistance training (while equating all other training variables, such as training frequency and volume, between the groups) on muscle strength and/or muscle size were included in the present review. The random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Meta-analyses explored (1) the differences in strength expression between morning and evening hours at baseline; (2) the differences in strength within the groups training in the morning and evening by using their post-intervention strength data from the morning and evening strength assessments; (3) the overall differences between the effects of morning and evening resistance training (with subgroup analyses conducted for studies that assessed strength in the morning hours and for the studies that assessed strength in the evening hours). Finally, a meta-analysis was also conducted for studies that assessed muscle hypertrophy. Eleven studies of moderate and good methodological quality were included in the present review. The primary findings of the review are as follows: (1) at baseline, a significant difference in strength between morning and evening is evident, with greater strength observed in the evening hours; (2) resistance training in the morning hours may increase strength assessed in the morning to similar levels as strength assessed in the evening; (3) training in the evening hours, however, maintains the general difference in strength across the day, with greater strength observed in the evening hours; (4) when comparing the effects between the groups training in the morning versus in the evening hours, increases in strength are similar in both groups, regardless of the time of day at which strength assessment is conducted; and (5) increases in muscle size are similar irrespective of the time of day at which the training is performed.

Scaling sports equipment to match the physical development of children allows motor skills to be performed with greater success and with more desirable movement patterns. It is unknown, however, how scaled equipment affects movement variability – a key factor associated with coordination. Our aim was to identify whether scaled sports equipment facilitates coordination and functional movement variability in children when performing a hitting for accuracy task in tennis. Twenty-five children were asked to execute a forehand stroke with the aim of hitting the ball to a target located 10 metres away. Participants performed the task in two conditions – a scaled equipment condition and a full-sized equipment condition. Scaled equipment led to superior hitting accuracy and greater temporal stability of the swing compared to full-sized equipment. Scaled equipment also afforded the emergence of a functional coupling between upper arm and forearm movement variability which helped regulate the distance between the shoulder and the racket. Comparatively there was a lack of coupling when full-sized equipment was used. Hence, scaled equipment promoted functional movement variability, whereas full-sized equipment resulted in the freezing of mechanical degrees of freedom. This suggests that children’s skill acquisition could be hindered and potentially regress when using inappropriately sized equipment.

An exoskeleton is a body‐worn mechanical device designed to work in concert with the user to enhance human capabilities. For the dismounted close combatant, an exoskeleton could be worn whilst performing a variety of complex tasks and duties. As such, there is a requirement for the human and the exoskeleton to readily adapt to different movements in different contexts. There have been many attempts to design an exoskeleton to improve the performance of the complex adaptive human system with limited success. Despite a vast investment in time and resources, exoskeletons have not yet been adopted for operational use by military leadership for use by the dismounted close combatant as they are yet to demonstrate substantive augmentation to individual warfighter and collective team capability. We argue that a major limitation of current exoskeleton systems is their inability to concurrently adapt to the user, task and environment. Unless a device can meet this requirement, it is unlikely to offer a comparative benefit to the dismounted close combatant. This paper will present the state of the art of current exoskeleton technology, and recommend future research necessary to reach an acceptable standard of augmentation and thereby lead to widespread adoption.

Foot strike mode and footwear features are known to affect ankle joint kinematics and loading patterns, but how those factors are related to the ankle dynamic properties is less clear. In our study, two distinct samples of experienced long-distance runners: habitual rearfoot strikers (n = 10) and habitual forefoot strikers (n = 10), were analysed while running at constant speed on an instrumented treadmill in three footwear conditions. The joint dynamic stiffness was analysed for three subphases of the moment–angle plot: early rising, late rising and descending. Habitual rearfoot strikers displayed a statistically (p < 0.05) higher ankle dynamic stiffness in all combinations of shoes and subphases, except in early stance in supportive shoes. In minimal-supportive shoes, both groups had the lowest dynamic stiffness values for early and late rising (initial contact through mid-stance), whilst the highest stiffness values were at late rising in minimal shoes for both rearfoot and forefoot strikers (0.21 ± 0.04, 0.24 ± 0.06 (Nm/kg/°∙100), respectively). In conclusion, habitual forefoot strikers may have access to a wider physiological range of the muscle torque and joint angle. This increased potential may allow forefoot strikers to adapt to different footwear by regulating ankle dynamic stiffness depending upon the motor task.