Sports Medicine最新文献

Background: High-carbohydrate diets are often recommended to enhance resistance training-induced muscle hypertrophy; however, the isolated effect of carbohydrate intake on muscle growth has not been systematically analyzed outside ketogenic diet conditions.

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether a higher carbohydrate intake influences muscle hypertrophy under isonitrogenous conditions.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in the MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, SciELO, and Google Scholar databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing higher with lower carbohydrate intakes, whether via supplementation or diet, during resistance training in healthy adults with a measure of muscle size as an outcome. The search was last updated on 26 June, 2025. A random-effects model was used to meta-analyze standardized mean difference (SMD) scores according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ², T², I², and prediction intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB2) tool. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Study quality was assessed using the Assessment of Study Quality and Reporting in Exercise (TESTEX) scale.

Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. A pooled analysis revealed no significant effect of carbohydrate intake on muscle hypertrophy (SMD = 0.15, p = 0.23), with negligible heterogeneity across studies. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings, and no evidence of publication bias was detected. Subgroup analyses limited to isocaloric trials (SMD = 0.15, p = 0.60) and those employing direct imaging of muscle size (e.g., ultrasound) also yielded non-significant results (SMD =  - 0.26 based on only two studies). TESTEX study quality ranged from fair to good with an average score of 9.8 out of 15, but GRADE certainty of evidence was low (2/4) because of imprecision and a moderate risk of bias.

Conclusions: A higher carbohydrate intake may not independently enhance muscle hypertrophy during resistance training, though certainty of evidence is low. Future studies should employ stricter energy intake control and utilize direct morphological assessments to clarify the role of carbohydrate intake independent of total energy balance.

Clinical trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42024589461.

Background: Concurrent training (CT), the combination of resistance training (RT) and endurance training (ET), is widely used in athletic and clinical settings. However, concerns about a potential interference effect have prompted ongoing debate regarding its impact on strength, power, hypertrophy, and aerobic capacity.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and PsycNet following PRISMA guidelines and the four-eyes principle (28th February 2025). Main outcomes included aerobic capacity, muscle strength, power, and hypertrophy. Subgroup analyses were performed based on training modality, performance level, age, resistance training load, and endurance intensity.

Results: Seventeen meta-analyses comprising 144 individual studies and 1492 healthy participants were included. Umbrella data revealed comparable improvements in aerobic capacity for CT and ET. CT revealed significantly greater strength adaptations compared with ET (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.59; p < 0.001). Compared with RT, CT significantly improved aerobic capacity (SMD 0.77; p = 0.02), while strength, power, and hypertrophy outcomes were comparable. No significant effects of training sequence were found; however, trends suggest performing RT before ET may favor strength (SMD 1.69; p < 0.001) and hypertrophy (SMD 0.83; p = 0.36) gains.

Conclusion: CT improves both aerobic capacity and strength-related outcomes, making it a valuable strategy for comprehensive fitness development for recreationally trained individuals. While no relevant differences were found regarding the training sequence, performing RT before ET may enhance strength and hypertrophy adaptations. However, data from highly trained to elite athletes remain scarce and warrant further investigation.

Prospero registration number: CRD42025646460.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to describe and compare symptom characteristics using individual symptom items and symptom clusters over time between collegiate athletes with and without persisting symptoms after concussion (PSaC).

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. Data from the National Collegiate Athletic Association and US Department of Defense Concussion Assessment, Research, and Education Consortium were analyzed. PSaC was defined as symptoms lasting longer than 28 days post-concussion, while NoPSaC included individuals who became asymptomatic within 28 days. We analyzed 323 PSaC cases and 3973 cases without PSaC. Symptoms were assessed through the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3rd edition symptom checklist during the initial 14 days after concussion. Individual symptom scores and symptom cluster scores were collected as outcomes. We conducted separate generalized linear mixed models for each symptom and symptom cluster using ordinal distribution. Effects included group main effect, time main effect, and its interaction (group × time).

Results: There were significant interactions for all individual symptoms and symptom clusters (p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis revealed that the PSaC group experienced significantly more severe symptoms across 14 days post-concussion for all individual symptoms and symptom clusters, relative to the NoPSaC group. The highest symptom score reported was headaches followed by 'pressure in head' during the first week of the injury.

Conclusion: Our findings highlighted the significant differences in symptom recovery patterns between individuals with and without PSaC. The PSaC group reported significantly higher symptom scores and showed less consistent, slower, and less pronounced symptom improvement across concussion recovery. In contrast, the NoPSaC group showed consistent symptom improvement.

Background: Optimising performance with a driver, fairway woods and long irons is a key focus for many golfers, with the primary goal of hitting the ball as far as possible while maintaining the ball in play. As such, recent years have seen a strong focus in the golf literature on how to maximise performance off the tee by investigating the factors that lead to the increase in clubhead speed (CHS). These factors include: (i) effective use of ground reaction force (GRF) during the swing and (ii) the path followed by the centre of pressure (CoP).

Objectives: The primary purpose of this systematic review was to investigate GRF and CoP within golf research and to identify what associations they have with CHS and skill level.

Methods: This systematic review followed the most recent Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. In total, 129 studies where initially retrieved from SPORTDiscus, Medline and CINAHL databases, with studies meeting the inclusion criteria being subject to Newcastle-Ottawa's quality assessment criteria (with a maximum score of 9 being possible).

Results: A total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Nine empirical investigations showed moderate-to-strong relationships between either: (i) CoP and CHS or (ii) GRF and CHS. In addition, more skilled golfers tended to exhibit higher GRF and superior CHS than less skilled golfers. From a quality assessment standpoint, all 24 studies scored either a 7 or 8.

Conclusions: Changes in both CoP and GRF represent important factors which contribute to superior golf performance, as defined by increases in CHS or reduced handicaps. Clearly defined methods for assessing force during the golf swing and universal terminology regarding GRF and CoP metrics are recommended for further research.