The Longitudinal Effects of Resisted and Assisted Sprint Training on Sprint Kinematics, Acceleration, and Maximum Velocity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES Sports Medicine - Open Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1186/s40798-024-00777-7
Simen Myrvang, Roland van den Tillaar
{"title":"The Longitudinal Effects of Resisted and Assisted Sprint Training on Sprint Kinematics, Acceleration, and Maximum Velocity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Simen Myrvang, Roland van den Tillaar","doi":"10.1186/s40798-024-00777-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sprinting is important for both individual and team sports, and enhancing performance is often done through resisted, assisted, or combined sprint training. However, the effectiveness of these methods compared to traditional sprint training remains inconclusive. The objective of this review with meta-analysis was to review the current literature on intervention studies analyzing the effects of resisted, assisted, and combined (resisted-assisted) training on sprint kinematics and performance in terms of acceleration and maximum velocity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted using SPORTDiscus up to and including April 19, 2023. The following eligibility criteria were applied: (1) a longitudinal study over a minimum of four weeks; (2) studies using resistance (sleds, parachutes, uphill slope, towing devices) or assistance (towing devices, downhill slope), or a combination of both; (3) a main intervention focused on resisted or assisted training, or a combination of both; (4) measurement of maximum velocity, acceleration measured in (s) with a minimum distance of 10-m, or kinematic changes such as step frequency, ground contact time, flight time, and step length; and (5) peer-reviewed studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one studies were included in this review with meta-analysis. Kinematic changes, changes in acceleration, and changes in maximum velocity were analyzed. Only resisted sprint training was associated with a significant improvement in 10-m acceleration compared to normal (i.e. without assistance or resistance) sprinting (Z = 2.01, P = 0.04). With resisted, assisted and combined sprint training no significant changes in kinematics, 20-m times or maximum velocity were found when compared to normal sprint training. However, in the within group, effect sizes resisted sprint training had a moderate effect on 10-m times. A moderate effect on ground contact time, step frequency, 10-and 20-meter time after assisted sprint training was found, while combined sprint training had a moderate effect on maximum velocity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Resisted sprint training seems to be effective for improving acceleration ability, with significant decreases in the 10-m times. There were no other significant findings, suggesting that normal sprinting yields the same change in 20-m times, kinematics and maximum velocity as resisted, assisted and combined sprint training. However, moderate effect sizes using these different training methods were found, which may suggest that the different training forms could be useful for improving different parts of the sprint and changing the kinematics. Combination (uphill-downhill) sprint training seems to be effective at improving maximum velocity, while assisted sprint training was the most effective training to increase step frequency, which can affect sprint performance positively. However, more studies, especially in assisted sprints, need to be conducted to determine the full effect of these training forms.</p>","PeriodicalId":21788,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine - Open","volume":"10 1","pages":"110"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11469994/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine - Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-024-00777-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sprinting is important for both individual and team sports, and enhancing performance is often done through resisted, assisted, or combined sprint training. However, the effectiveness of these methods compared to traditional sprint training remains inconclusive. The objective of this review with meta-analysis was to review the current literature on intervention studies analyzing the effects of resisted, assisted, and combined (resisted-assisted) training on sprint kinematics and performance in terms of acceleration and maximum velocity.

Methods: A literature search was conducted using SPORTDiscus up to and including April 19, 2023. The following eligibility criteria were applied: (1) a longitudinal study over a minimum of four weeks; (2) studies using resistance (sleds, parachutes, uphill slope, towing devices) or assistance (towing devices, downhill slope), or a combination of both; (3) a main intervention focused on resisted or assisted training, or a combination of both; (4) measurement of maximum velocity, acceleration measured in (s) with a minimum distance of 10-m, or kinematic changes such as step frequency, ground contact time, flight time, and step length; and (5) peer-reviewed studies.

Results: Twenty-one studies were included in this review with meta-analysis. Kinematic changes, changes in acceleration, and changes in maximum velocity were analyzed. Only resisted sprint training was associated with a significant improvement in 10-m acceleration compared to normal (i.e. without assistance or resistance) sprinting (Z = 2.01, P = 0.04). With resisted, assisted and combined sprint training no significant changes in kinematics, 20-m times or maximum velocity were found when compared to normal sprint training. However, in the within group, effect sizes resisted sprint training had a moderate effect on 10-m times. A moderate effect on ground contact time, step frequency, 10-and 20-meter time after assisted sprint training was found, while combined sprint training had a moderate effect on maximum velocity.

Conclusion: Resisted sprint training seems to be effective for improving acceleration ability, with significant decreases in the 10-m times. There were no other significant findings, suggesting that normal sprinting yields the same change in 20-m times, kinematics and maximum velocity as resisted, assisted and combined sprint training. However, moderate effect sizes using these different training methods were found, which may suggest that the different training forms could be useful for improving different parts of the sprint and changing the kinematics. Combination (uphill-downhill) sprint training seems to be effective at improving maximum velocity, while assisted sprint training was the most effective training to increase step frequency, which can affect sprint performance positively. However, more studies, especially in assisted sprints, need to be conducted to determine the full effect of these training forms.

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
阻力和辅助短跑训练对短跑运动学、加速度和最大速度的纵向影响:系统回顾与元分析》。
背景:短跑对个人和团队运动都很重要,通常通过阻力、辅助或综合短跑训练来提高成绩。然而,与传统短跑训练相比,这些方法的有效性仍无定论。本综述和荟萃分析的目的是回顾目前有关干预研究的文献,分析阻力、辅助和联合(阻力-辅助)训练对短跑运动学以及加速度和最大速度表现的影响:使用 SPORTDiscus 对截至 2023 年 4 月 19 日(含)的文献进行了检索。采用的资格标准如下(1) 至少为期四周的纵向研究;(2) 使用阻力(雪橇、降落伞、上坡、牵引装置)或辅助(牵引装置、下坡)或两者结合的研究;(3) 主要干预措施侧重于阻力或辅助训练,或两者结合;(4) 测量最大速度、以(秒)为单位测量的加速度(最小距离为 10 米)或运动学变化,如步频、地面接触时间、飞行时间和步长;以及 (5) 同行评议研究。结果:本综述共纳入 21 项研究,并进行了荟萃分析。分析了运动变化、加速度变化和最大速度变化。与正常(即无辅助或阻力)短跑相比,只有阻力短跑训练能显著提高 10 米加速度(Z = 2.01,P = 0.04)。与正常短跑训练相比,阻力、辅助和综合短跑训练在运动学、20 米时间或最大速度方面均未发现明显变化。不过,在组内,阻力短跑训练对 10 米时间的影响大小适中。辅助短跑训练对地面接触时间、步频、10 米和 20 米时间的影响为中等,而综合短跑训练对最大速度的影响为中等:结论:阻力短跑训练似乎能有效提高加速能力,10 米时间显著缩短。结论:阻力短跑训练似乎对提高加速能力有效,10 米加速时间明显缩短,但没有其他明显的发现,这表明正常短跑与阻力、辅助和综合短跑训练对 20 米加速时间、运动学和最大速度的影响相同。不过,使用这些不同训练方法的效果大小适中,这可能表明不同的训练形式对于改善短跑的不同部分和改变运动学特性是有用的。组合(上坡-下坡)短跑训练似乎能有效提高最大速度,而辅助短跑训练是提高步频最有效的训练,步频能对短跑成绩产生积极影响。不过,要确定这些训练形式的全部效果,还需要进行更多的研究,尤其是辅助短跑方面的研究。
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
Sports Medicine - Open
Sports Medicine - Open SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
142
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sleeping Beauty? A Prospective Study on the Prevalence of Sleep Problems and Their Potential Determinants in Professional Dancers. Correction: Sex Differences in Performance and Performance-Determining Factors in the Olympic Winter Endurance Sports. Critical Fluctuations as an Early Warning Signal of Sports Injuries? A Proof of Concept Using Football Monitoring Data. The Use of Extended Reality Technologies in Sport Perceptual-Cognitive Skill Research: A Systematic Scoping Review. Association Between Inter-Limb Asymmetry and Determinants of Middle- and Long-distance Running Performance in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review.
×
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