Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 45 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYPhysiological reports

Optimal power load ranges for the power clean and hang power clean weight-lifting derivatives: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

  • Jiaxuan Sun1,2
  • Yiming Wu3
  • Yifan Zhang2
  • Lijun Shi1,2
  • Li Li1,2
  1. 1Department of Exercise Physiology, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China.
  2. 2Laboratory of Sports Stress and Adaptation of General Administration of Sport, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China.
  3. 3Shaanxi Normal University, Shaanxi, China.
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the impact of different loads on the output power of the power clean (PC) and hang power clean (HPC). A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and EBSCO identified 14 eligible studies involving 197 participants. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to low loads (≤40% one-repetition maximum [1RM]), moderate-to-high (>40% to ≤70% 1RM), high (>70% to ≤85% 1RM), and very high loads (>85% 1RM) produced greater acute peak power in both the PC (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI [0.17, 0.98]; SMD = 0.80, 95% CI [0.39, 1.21]; SMD = 0.68, 95% CI [0.16, 1.20] respectively) and the HPC (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI [0.28, 0.88]; SMD = 0.80, 95% CI [0.20, 1.40]; SMD = 0.94, 95% CI [0.55, 1.32] respectively) (all p < 0.01). In contrast, pairwise differences among Zones 2-4 were small to trivial and statistically nonsignificant for both the PC (SMD = 0.23, 0.19, and 0.06, respectively) and the HPC (SMD = 0.18, 0.01, and -0.21, respectively), consistent with a plateau in the power-load relationship once loads exceed 40% 1RM. Thus, the present evidence supports loads >40% 1RM as a broad range for high acute peak power expression. Pairwise comparisons among the >40% to ≤70%, >70% to ≤85%, and >85% 1RM zones did not demonstrate statistical superiority of any single higher-load range.

Related

  1. Optimal Enteral Iron Dosing in Preterm and Very-Low-Birth-Weight Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Anas Heissat, Dana A Al-Jarrah, Hashem T Kanaan +9
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textNutritionObstetrics, gynaecology & paediatricsEurope PMCPMC
  2. Investigating 24-Hour Urine Expected Ranges of Non-Kidney Stone Formers: an EAU Endourology Research Group Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    K. Noble, A. Glubb, P. Roy +12
    medRxivPreprintAll rights reservedFull textGeneral medicinemedRxiv
  3. Defining plasma concentration ranges for central nervous system and cardiovascular toxicity of local anesthetics: A systematic review.
    Alessandro De Cassai, Burhan Dost, Yunus Emre Karapinar +4
    Saudi journal of anaesthesiaPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-SAFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMCPMC
  4. Synthesis and Study of the Properties of Dual-Substituted Amphiphilic Low-Molecular-Weight Chitosan Derivatives
    Balzhima Shagdarova, Nadezhda Vasileva, Alexey Lunkov
    PolymersPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Pharmacology & toxicologyCrossref
  5. Efficacy of artemisinin derivatives and kelch13 mutations in Plasmodium falciparum: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Özlem Ulusan Bağcı, Atilla Halil Elhan, Gülay Aral Akarsu
    Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and HygienePeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textEpidemiology & public healthPMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{sun2026optimal,
  title = {{Optimal power load ranges for the power clean and hang power clean weight-lifting derivatives: A systematic review and meta-analysis.}},
  author = {Jiaxuan Sun and Yiming Wu and Yifan Zhang and Lijun Shi and Li Li},
  journal = {Physiological reports},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  doi = {10.14814/phy2.71154},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968433},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Optimal power load ranges for the power clean and hang power clean weight-lifting derivatives: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
AU  - Jiaxuan Sun
AU  - Yiming Wu
AU  - Yifan Zhang
AU  - Lijun Shi
AU  - Li Li
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/11/01
JO  - Physiological reports
DO  - 10.14814/phy2.71154
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968433
AB  - The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the impact of different loads on the output power of the power clean (PC) and hang power clean (HPC). A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and EBSCO identified 14 eligible studies involving 197 participants. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to low loads (≤40% one-repetition maximum [1RM]), moderate-to-high (>40% to ≤70% 1RM), high (>70% to ≤85% 1RM), and very high loads (>85% 1RM) produced greater acute peak power in both the PC (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI [0.17, 0.98]; SMD = 0.80, 95% CI [0.39, 1.21]; SMD = 0.68, 95% CI [0.16, 1.20] respectively) and the HPC (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI [0.28, 0.88]; SMD = 0.80, 95% CI [0.20, 1.40]; SMD = 0.94, 95% CI [0.55, 1.32] respectively) (all p < 0.01). In contrast, pairwise differences among Zones 2-4 were small to trivial and statistically nonsignificant for both the PC (SMD = 0.23, 0.19, and 0.06, respectively) and the HPC (SMD = 0.18, 0.01, and -0.21, respectively), consistent with a plateau in the power-load relationship once loads exceed 40% 1RM. Thus, the present evidence supports loads >40% 1RM as a broad range for high acute peak power expression. Pairwise comparisons among the >40% to ≤70%, >70% to ≤85%, and >85% 1RM zones did not demonstrate statistical superiority of any single higher-load range.
SN  - 2051-817X
ER  -