TY - JOUR A1 - Behm, David George A1 - Young, James D. A1 - Whitten, Joseph H. D. A1 - Reid, Jonathan C. A1 - Quigley, Patrick J. A1 - Low, Jonathan A1 - Li, Yimeng A1 - Lima, Camila D. A1 - Hodgson, Daniel D. A1 - Chaouachi, Anis A1 - Prieske, Olaf A1 - Granacher, Urs T1 - Effectiveness of Traditional Strength vs. Power Training on Muscle Strength, Power and Speed with Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis JF - Frontiers in physiology N2 - Numerous national associations and multiple reviews have documented the safety and efficacy of strength training for children and adolescents. The literature highlights the significant training-induced increases in strength associated with youth strength training. However, the effectiveness of youth strength training programs to improve power measures is not as clear. This discrepancy may be related to training and testing specificity. Most prior youth strength training programs emphasized lower intensity resistance with relatively slow movements. Since power activities typically involve higher intensity, explosive-like contractions with higher angular velocities (e.g., plyometrics), there is a conflict between the training medium and testing measures. This meta-analysis compared strength (e.g., training with resistance or body mass) and power training programs (e.g., plyometric training) on proxies of muscle strength, power, and speed. A systematic literature search using a Boolean Search Strategy was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, SPORT Discus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar and revealed 652 hits. After perusal of title, abstract, and full text, 107 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed small to moderate magnitude changes for training specificity with jump measures. In other words, power training was more effective than strength training for improving youth jump height. For sprint measures, strength training was more effective than power training with youth. Furthermore, strength training exhibited consistently large magnitude changes to lower body strength measures, which contrasted with the generally trivial, small and moderate magnitude training improvements of power training upon lower body strength, sprint and jump measures, respectively. Maturity related inadequacies in eccentric strength and balance might influence the lack of training specificity with the unilateral landings and propulsions associated with sprinting. Based on this meta-analysis, strength training should be incorporated prior to power training in order to establish an adequate foundation of strength for power training activities. KW - children KW - boys KW - girls KW - plyometric training KW - resistance training Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00423 SN - 1664-042X VL - 8 PB - Frontiers Research Foundation CY - Lausanne ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Lacroix, Andre A1 - Hortobagyi, Tibor A1 - Beurskens, Rainer A1 - Granacher, Urs T1 - Effects of Supervised vs. Unsupervised Training Programs on Balance and Muscle Strength in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis JF - Sports medicine N2 - Objectives The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to quantify the effectiveness of supervised vs. unsupervised balance and/or resistance training programs on measures of balance and muscle strength/ power in healthy older adults. In addition, the impact of supervision on training-induced adaptive processes was evaluated in the form of dose-response relationships by analyzing randomized controlled trials that compared supervised with unsupervised trials. Data Sources A computerized systematic literature search was performed in the electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, and SportDiscus to detect articles examining the role of supervision in balance and/or resistance training in older adults. Study Eligibility Criteria The initially identified 6041 articles were systematically screened. Studies were included if they examined balance and/or resistance training in adults aged >= 65 years with no relevant diseases and registered at least one behavioral balance (e.g., time during single leg stance) and/or muscle strength/ power outcome (e.g., time for 5-Times-Chair-Rise-Test). Finally, 11 studies were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. Study Appraisal Weighted mean standardized mean differences between subjects (SMDbs) of supervised vs. unsupervised balance/resistance training studies were calculated. The included studies were coded for the following variables: number of participants, sex, age, number and type of interventions, type of balance/strength tests, and change (%) from pre- to post-intervention values. Additionally, we coded training according to the following modalities: period, frequency, volume, modalities of supervision (i.e., number of supervised/unsupervised sessions within the supervised or unsupervised training groups, respectively). Heterogeneity was computed using I 2 and chi(2) statistics. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. Results Our analyses revealed that in older adults, supervised balance/resistance training was superior compared with unsupervised balance/resistance training in improving measures of static steady-state balance (mean SMDbs = 0.28, p = 0.39), dynamic steady-state balance (mean SMDbs = 0.35, p = 0.02), proactive balance (mean SMDbs = 0.24, p = 0.05), balance test batteries (mean SMDbs = 0.53, p = 0.02), and measures of muscle strength/power (mean SMDbs = 0.51, p = 0.04). Regarding the examined dose-response relationships, our analyses showed that a number of 10-29 additional supervised sessions in the supervised training groups compared with the unsupervised training groups resulted in the largest effects for static steady-state balance (mean SMDbs = 0.35), dynamic steady-state balance (mean SMDbs = 0.37), and muscle strength/power (mean SMDbs = 1.12). Further, >= 30 additional supervised sessions in the supervised training groups were needed to produce the largest effects on proactive balance (mean SMDbs = 0.30) and balance test batteries (mean SMDbs = 0.77). Effects in favor of supervised programs were larger for studies that did not include any supervised sessions in their unsupervised programs (mean SMDbs: 0.28-1.24) compared with studies that implemented a few supervised sessions in their unsupervised programs (e.g., three supervised sessions throughout the entire intervention program; SMDbs: -0.06 to 0.41). Limitations The present findings have to be interpreted with caution because of the low number of eligible studies and the moderate methodological quality of the included studies, which is indicated by a median Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale score of 5. Furthermore, we indirectly compared dose-response relationships across studies and not from single controlled studies. Conclusions Our analyses suggest that supervised balance and/or resistance training improved measures of balance and muscle strength/power to a greater extent than unsupervised programs in older adults. Owing to the small number of available studies, we were unable to establish a clear dose-response relationship with regard to the impact of supervision. However, the positive effects of supervised training are particularly prominent when compared with completely unsupervised training programs. It is therefore recommended to include supervised sessions (i.e., two out of three sessions/week) in balance/resistance training programs to effectively improve balance and muscle strength/power in older adults. Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0747-6 SN - 0112-1642 SN - 1179-2035 VL - 47 SP - 2341 EP - 2361 PB - Springer CY - Northcote ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Wick, Kristin A1 - Leeger-Aschmann, Claudia S. A1 - Monn, Nico D. A1 - Radtke, Thomas A1 - Ott, Laura V. A1 - Rebholz, Cornelia E. A1 - Cruz, Sergio A1 - Gerber, Natalie A1 - Schmutz, Einat A. A1 - Puder, Jardena J. A1 - Munsch, Simone A1 - Kakebeeke, Tanja H. A1 - Jenni, Oskar G. A1 - Granacher, Urs A1 - Kriemler, Susi T1 - Interventions to Promote Fundamental Movement Skills in Childcare and Kindergarten: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis JF - Sports medicine N2 - Background Proficiency in fundamental movement skills (FMS) lays the foundation for being physically active and developing more complex motor skills. Improving these motor skills may provide enhanced opportunities for the development of a variety of perceptual, social, and cognitive skills. Objective The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effects of FMS interventions on actual FMS, targeting typically developing young children. Method Searches in seven databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) up to August 2015 were completed. Trials with children (aged 2-6 years) in childcare or kindergarten settings that applied FMS-enhancing intervention programs of at least 4 weeks and meeting the inclusion criteria were included. Standardized data extraction forms were used. Risk of bias was assessed using a standard scoring scheme (Effective Public Health Practice Project-Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies [EPHPP]). We calculated effects on overall FMS, object control and locomotor subscales (OCS and LMS) by weighted standardized mean differences (SMDbetween) using random-effects models. Certainty in training effects was evaluated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation System). Results Thirty trials (15 randomized controlled trials and 15 controlled trials) involving 6126 preschoolers (aged 3.3-5.5 years) revealed significant differences among groups in favor of the intervention group (INT) with small-to-large effects on overall FMS (SMDbetween 0.46), OCS (SMDbetween 1.36), and LMS (SMDbetween 0.94). Our certainty in the treatment estimates based on GRADE is very low. Conclusions Although there is relevant effectiveness of programs to improve FMS proficiency in healthy young children, they need to be interpreted with care as they are based on low-quality evidence and immediate post-intervention effects without long-term follow-up. Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0723-1 SN - 0112-1642 SN - 1179-2035 VL - 47 SP - 2045 EP - 2068 PB - Springer CY - Northcote ER -