Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of plyometric vs. resistance training on lower limb explosive power and speed.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-25 DOI:10.23736/S0022-4707.24.15819-7
Jiqing Cui, Yufei Liu, Fangzhou He, Yuming Bu
{"title":"Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of plyometric vs. resistance training on lower limb explosive power and speed.","authors":"Jiqing Cui, Yufei Liu, Fangzhou He, Yuming Bu","doi":"10.23736/S0022-4707.24.15819-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This meta-analysis examined the effects of plyometric training (PT) and resistance training (RT) on lower limb explosive power and speed quality in athletes, including lower limb jumping and short-distance sprinting abilities.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>Empirical studies investigating the PT and RT effect on lower limb explosive power were identified using the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSOC, and CNKI databases. Heterogeneity testing and potential publication bias assessment were conducted using STATA 15 and Review Manager 5.4.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>There were 20 articles included, involving 457 participants (230 in the PT group and 227 in the RT group). The meta-analysis results indicated no significant difference in countermovement jump (CMJ) between PT and RT groups (SMD = -1.03; 95% CI = -5.20 - 3.14). Additionally, no significant differences were found between the two training methods for standing long jump (SLJ) (MD = -0.04; 95% CI = 0.00 - 0.09), squat jump (SJ) (MD = -0.79; 95% CI = 1.79 - 0.22), 10-m sprint (MD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.06 - 0.02), and 30-m sprint (MD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.15 - 0.11). However, PT and RT comparisons revealed a significant difference between the 5-m sprint (MD = -0.03; 95% CI = -0.05 - 0.00) and the 20-m sprint (MD = -0.05; 95% CI = -0.09 - 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis demonstrated that relative to RT, PT significantly improved the sprinting abilities of athletes at 5-m and 20-m distances. However, no significant differences were observed in sprinting at 10 and 30 meters, CMJ, SLJ, and SJ, indicating consistent effects of PT and RT on jumping performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":17013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness","volume":" ","pages":"69-79"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.24.15819-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This meta-analysis examined the effects of plyometric training (PT) and resistance training (RT) on lower limb explosive power and speed quality in athletes, including lower limb jumping and short-distance sprinting abilities.

Evidence acquisition: Empirical studies investigating the PT and RT effect on lower limb explosive power were identified using the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSOC, and CNKI databases. Heterogeneity testing and potential publication bias assessment were conducted using STATA 15 and Review Manager 5.4.

Evidence synthesis: There were 20 articles included, involving 457 participants (230 in the PT group and 227 in the RT group). The meta-analysis results indicated no significant difference in countermovement jump (CMJ) between PT and RT groups (SMD = -1.03; 95% CI = -5.20 - 3.14). Additionally, no significant differences were found between the two training methods for standing long jump (SLJ) (MD = -0.04; 95% CI = 0.00 - 0.09), squat jump (SJ) (MD = -0.79; 95% CI = 1.79 - 0.22), 10-m sprint (MD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.06 - 0.02), and 30-m sprint (MD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.15 - 0.11). However, PT and RT comparisons revealed a significant difference between the 5-m sprint (MD = -0.03; 95% CI = -0.05 - 0.00) and the 20-m sprint (MD = -0.05; 95% CI = -0.09 - 0.01).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated that relative to RT, PT significantly improved the sprinting abilities of athletes at 5-m and 20-m distances. However, no significant differences were observed in sprinting at 10 and 30 meters, CMJ, SLJ, and SJ, indicating consistent effects of PT and RT on jumping performance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于负重训练与阻力训练对下肢爆发力和速度影响的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
介绍:这项荟萃分析研究了负重训练(PT)和阻力训练(RT)对运动员下肢爆发力和速度素质(包括下肢跳跃和短距离冲刺能力)的影响:通过 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、EBSOC 和 CNKI 数据库确定了调查 PT 和 RT 对下肢爆发力影响的实证研究。使用 STATA 15 和 Review Manager 5.4 进行了异质性测试和潜在发表偏倚评估:共纳入 20 篇文章,涉及 457 名参与者(PT 组 230 人,RT 组 227 人)。荟萃分析结果表明,PT 组和 RT 组在反运动跳跃(CMJ)方面无显著差异(SMD = -1.03; 95% CI = -5.20 - 3.14)。此外,两种训练方法在立定跳远(SLJ)(MD = -0.04;95% CI = 0.00 - 0.09)、蹲跳(SJ)(MD = -0.79;95% CI = 1.79 - 0.22)、10 米短跑(MD = -0.02;95% CI = -0.06 - 0.02)和 30 米短跑(MD = -0.02;95% CI = -0.15 - 0.11)方面也没有发现明显差异。然而,PT 和 RT 比较显示,5 米短跑(MD = -0.03; 95% CI = -0.05 - 0.00)和 20 米短跑(MD = -0.05; 95% CI = -0.09 - 0.01)之间存在显著差异:这项荟萃分析表明,相对于 RT,PT 能显著提高运动员在 5 米和 20 米距离上的短跑能力。然而,在 10 米和 30 米距离的短跑、CMJ、SLJ 和 SJ 中未观察到明显差异,这表明 PT 和 RT 对跳跃成绩的影响是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
393
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness publishes scientific papers relating to the area of the applied physiology, preventive medicine, sports medicine and traumatology, sports psychology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of editorials, original articles, review articles, case reports, special articles, letters to the Editor and guidelines.
期刊最新文献
Caribbean and Latin dance: evidence about health in professional and non-professional dancers. Characteristics of trunk and pelvic kinematics during batting motion in baseball players with low back pain history. An intermittent recovery test for soccer players: a validation study. Differences in throwing kinematics due to changes in run-up speed in javelin throwing. Cut-off values for estimated cardiorespiratory fitness in terms of physical functioning among middle-aged to older adults.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1