Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (15)
Document Type
- Review (15) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (15)
Keywords
- resistance training (3)
- children (2)
- muscle strength (2)
- plyometric training (2)
- Aging (1)
- Endocrine (1)
- Exercise (1)
- Force (1)
- Gait biomechanics (1)
- Metabolism (1)
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.
Recently, there has been a proliferation of published articles on the effect of plyometric jump training, including several review articles and meta-analyses. However, these types of research articles are generally of narrow scope. Furthermore, methodological limitations among studies (e.g., a lack of active/passive control groups) prevent the generalization of results, and these factors need to be addressed by researchers. On that basis, the aims of this scoping review were to (1) characterize the main elements of plyometric jump training studies (e.g., training protocols) and (2) provide future directions for research. From 648 potentially relevant articles, 242 were eligible for inclusion in this review. The main issues identified related to an insufficient number of studies conducted in females, youths, and individual sports (~ 24.0, ~ 37.0, and ~ 12.0% of overall studies, respectively); insufficient reporting of effect size values and training prescription (~ 34.0 and ~ 55.0% of overall studies, respectively); and studies missing an active/passive control group and randomization (~ 40.0 and ~ 20.0% of overall studies, respectively). Furthermore, plyometric jump training was often combined with other training methods and added to participants’ daily training routines (~ 47.0 and ~ 39.0% of overall studies, respectively), thus distorting conclusions on its independent effects. Additionally, most studies lasted no longer than 7 weeks. In future, researchers are advised to conduct plyometric training studies of high methodological quality (e.g., randomized controlled trials). More research is needed in females, youth, and individual sports. Finally, the identification of specific dose-response relationships following plyometric training is needed to specifically tailor intervention programs, particularly in the long term.
Background The importance of trunk muscle strength (TMS) for physical fitness and athletic performance has been demonstrated by studies reporting significant correlations between those capacities. However, evidence-based knowledge regarding the magnitude of correlations between TMS and proxies of physical fitness and athletic performance as well as potential effects of core strength training (CST) on TMS, physical fitness and athletic performance variables is currently lacking for trained individuals. Objective The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to quantify associations between variables of TMS, physical fitness and athletic performance and effects of CST on these measures in healthy trained individuals. Data Sources PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus were systematically screened from January 1984 to March 2015. Study Eligibility Criteria Studies were included that investigated healthy trained individuals aged 16-44 years and tested at least one measure of TMS, muscle strength, muscle power, balance, and/or athletic performance. Results Small-sized relationships of TMS with physical performance measures (-0.05 <= r <= 0.18) were found in 15 correlation studies. Sixteen intervention studies revealed large effects of CST on measures of TMS (SMD = 1.07) but small-to-medium-sized effects on proxies of physical performance (0 <= SMD <= 0.71) compared with no training or regular training only. The methodological quality of CST studies was low (median PEDro score = 4). Conclusions Our findings indicate that TMS plays only a minor role for physical fitness and athletic performance in trained individuals. In fact, CST appears to be an effective means to increase TMS and was associated with only limited gains in physical fitness and athletic performance measures when compared with no or only regular training.
Background
Jump training (JT) can be used to enhance the ability of skeletal muscle to exert maximal force in as short a time as possible. Despite its usefulness as a method of performance enhancement in athletes, only a small number of studies have investigated its effects on muscle power in older adults.
Objectives
The aims of this meta-analysis were to measure the effect of JT on muscular power in older adults (≥ 50 years), and to establish appropriate programming guidelines for this population.
Data Sources
The data sources utilised were Google Scholar, PubMed, and Microsoft Academic.
Study Eligibility Criteria
Studies were eligible for inclusion if they comprised JT interventions in healthy adults (≥ 50 years) who were free of any medical condition that could impair movement.
Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods
The inverse variance random-effects model for meta-analyses was used because it allocates a proportionate weight to trials based on the size of their individual standard errors and facilitates analysis while accounting for heterogeneity across studies. Effect sizes (ESs), calculated from a measure of muscular power, were represented by the standardised mean difference and were presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results
Thirteen training groups across nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. The magnitude of the main effect was ‘moderate’ (0.66, 95% CI 0.33, 0.98). ESs were larger in non-obese participants (body mass index [BMI] < 30 vs. ≥ 30 kg/m2; 1.03 [95% CI 0.34, 1.73] vs. 0.53 [95% CI − 0.03, 1.09]). Among the studies included in this review, just one reported an acute injury, which did not result in the participant ceasing their involvement. JT was more effective in programmes with more than one exercise (range 1–4 exercises; ES = 0.74 [95% CI − 0.49, 1.96] vs. 0.53 [95% CI 0.29, 0.78]), more than two sets per exercise (range 1–4 sets; ES = 0.91 [95% CI 0.04, 1.77] vs. 0.68 [95% CI 0.15, 1.21]), more than three jumps per set (range 1–14 jumps; ES = 1.02 [95% CI 0.16, 1.87] vs. 0.53 [95% CI − 0.03, 1.09]) and more than 25 jumps per session (range 6–200 jumps; ES = 0.88 [95% CI 0.05, 1.70] vs. 0.49 [95% CI 0.14, 0.83]).
Conclusions
JT is safe and effective in older adults. Practitioners should construct varied JT programmes that include more than one exercise and comprise more than two sets per exercise, more than three jumps per set, and 60 s of recovery between sets. An upper limit of three sets per exercise and ten jumps per set is recommended. Up to three training sessions per week can be performed.
Objectives To quantify age, sex, sport and training type-specific effects of resistance training on physical performance, and to characterise dose-response relationships of resistance training parameters that could maximise gains in physical performance in youth athletes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies. Data sources Studies were identified by systematic literature search in the databases PubMed and Web of Science (1985-2015). Weighted mean standardised mean differences (SMDwm) were calculated using random-effects models. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Only studies with an active control group were included if these investigated the effects of resistance training in youth athletes (6-18 years) and tested at least one physical performance measure. Results 43 studies met the inclusion criteria. Our analyses revealed moderate effects of resistance training on muscle strength and vertical jump performance (SMDwm 0.8-1.09), and small effects on linear sprint, agility and sport-specific performance (SMDwm 0.58-0.75). Effects were moderated by sex and resistance training type. Independently computed dose-response relationships for resistance training parameters revealed that a training period of >23 weeks, 5 sets/exercise, 6-8 repetitions/set, a training intensity of 80-89% of 1 repetition maximum (RM), and 3-4 min rest between sets were most effective to improve muscle strength (SMDwm 2.09-3.40). Summary/conclusions Resistance training is an effective method to enhance muscle strength and jump performance in youth athletes, moderated by sex and resistance training type. Dose-response relationships for key training parameters indicate that youth coaches should primarily implement resistance training programmes with fewer repetitions and higher intensities to improve physical performance measures of youth athletes.
Background: Post-activation potentiation (PAP) can elicit acute performance enhancements in variables of strength, power, and speed. However, it is unresolved whether the frequent integration of PAP eliciting conditioning activities in training (i.e., complex training) results in long-term adaptations. In this regard, it is of interest to know whether complex training results in larger performance enhancements as compared to more traditional and isolated training regimens (e. g., resistance training). Thus, this systematic literature review summarises the current state of the art regarding the effects of complex training on measures of strength, power, and speed in recreational, subelite, and elite athletes. Further, it provides information on training volume and intensities that proved to be effective.
Methods: Our literature search included the electronic databases Pubmed, SportDiscus, and Web of Science (1995 to September 2013). In total, 17 studies met the inclusionary criteria for review. Ten studies examined alternating complex training and 7 studies sequenced complex training.
Results: Our findings indicated small to large effects for both alternating complex training (countermovement jump height: +7.4 % [ESd = -0.43]; squat jump height: +9.8 % [ESd = -0.66]; sprint time: -2.4% [ESd = 0.63]) and sequenced complex training (countermovement jump height: +6.0 % [ESd = -0.83]; squat jump height: +11.9% [ESd = -0.97], sprint time: -0.7% [ESd = 0.52]) in measures of power and speed. As compared to more traditional training regimens, alternating and sequenced complex training showed only small effects in measures of strength, power, and speed. A more detailed analysis of alternating complex training revealed larger effects in countermovement jump height in recreational athletes (+9.7% [ESd = -0.57]) as compared to subelite and elite athletes (+2.7% [ESd = -0.15]). Based on the relevant and currently available literature, missing data (e.g., time for rest interval) and diverse information regarding training volume and intensity do not allow us to establish evidence-based dose-response relations for complex training.
Conclusion: Complex training represents an effective training regimen for athletes if the goal is to enhance strength, power, and speed. Studies with high methodological quality have to be conducted in the future to elucidate whether complex training is less, similar, or even more effective compared to more traditional training regimens. Finally, it should be clarified whether alternated and/or sequenced conditioning activities implemented in complex training actually elicit acute PAP effects.
Background Balance training (BT) has been used for the promotion of balance and sports-related skills as well as for prevention and rehabilitation of lower extremity sport injuries. However, evidence-based dose-response relationships in BT parameters have not yet been established.
Objective The objective of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis was to determine dose-response relationships in BT parameters that lead to improvements in balance in young healthy adults with different training status.
Data Sources A computerized systematic literature search was performed in the electronic databases PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and SPORTDiscus from January 1984 up to May 2014 to capture all articles related to BT in young healthy adults.
Study Eligibility Criteria A systematic approach was used to evaluate the 596 articles identified for initial review. Only randomized controlled studies were included if they investigated BT in young healthy adults (16-40 years) and tested at least one behavioral balance performance outcome. In total, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria for review.
Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods Studies were evaluated using the physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) scale. Within-subject effect sizes (ESdw) and between-subject effect sizes (ESdb) were calculated. The included studies were coded for the following criteria: training status (elite athletes, sub-elite athletes, recreational athletes, untrained subjects), training modalities (training period, frequency, volume, etc.), and balance outcome (test for the assessment of steady-state, proactive, and reactive balance).
Results Mean ESdb demonstrated that BT is an effective means to improve steady-state (ESdb = 0.73) and proactive balance (ESdb = 0.92) in healthy young adults. Studies including elite athletes showed the largest effects (ESdb = 1.29) on measures of steady-state balance as compared with studies analyzing sub-elite athletes (ESdb = 0.32), recreational athletes (ESdb = 0.69), and untrained subjects (ESdb = 0.82). Our analyses regarding dose-response relationships in BT revealed that a training period of 11-12 weeks (ESdb = 1.09), a training frequency of three (mean ESdb = 0.72) or six (single ESdb = 1.84) sessions per week, at least 16-19 training sessions in total (ESdb = 1.12), a duration of 11-15 min for a single training session (ESdb = 1.11), four exercises per training session (ESdb = 1.29), two sets per exercise (ESdb = 1.63), and a duration of 21-40 s for a single BT exercise (ESdb = 1.06) is most effective in improving measures of steady-state balance. Due to a small number of studies, dose-response relationships of BT for measures of proactive and reactive balance could not be qualified.
Limitations The present findings must be interpreted with caution because it is difficult to separate the impact of a single training modality (e.g., training frequency) from that of the others. Moreover, the quality of the included studies was rather limited, with a mean PEDro score of 5.
Conclusions Our detailed analyses revealed effective BT parameters for the improvement of steady-state balance. Thus, practitioners and coaches are advised to consult the identified dose-response relationships of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis to implement effective BT protocols in clinical and sports-related contexts. However, further research of high methodological quality is needed to (1) determine dose-response relationships of BT for measures of proactive and reactive balance, (2) define effective sequencing protocols in BT (e.g., BT before or after a regular training session), (3) discern the effects of detraining, and (4) develop a feasible and effective method to regulate training intensity in BT.
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.
We quantified the acute and chronic effects of whole body vibration on athletic performance or its proxy measures in competitive and/or elite athletes.
Systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Whole body vibration combined with exercise had an overall 0.3 % acute effect on maximal voluntary leg force (-6.4 %, effect size = -0.43, 1 study), leg power (4.7 %, weighted mean effect size = 0.30, 6 studies), flexibility (4.6 %, effect size = -0.12 to 0.22, 2 studies), and athletic performance (-1.9 %, weighted mean effect size = 0.26, 6 studies) in 191 (103 male, 88 female) athletes representing eight sports (overall effect size = 0.28). Whole body vibration combined with exercise had an overall 10.2 % chronic effect on maximal voluntary leg force (14.6 %, weighted mean effect size = 0.44, 5 studies), leg power (10.7 %, weighted mean effect size = 0.42, 9 studies), flexibility (16.5 %, effect size = 0.57 to 0.61, 2 studies), and athletic performance (-1.2 %, weighted mean effect size = 0.45, 5 studies) in 437 (169 male, 268 female) athletes (overall effect size = 0.44).
Whole body vibration has small and inconsistent acute and chronic effects on athletic performance in competitive and/or elite athletes. These findings lead to the hypothesis that neuromuscular adaptive processes following whole body vibration are not specific enough to enhance athletic performance. Thus, other types of exercise programs (e.g., resistance training) are recommended if the goal is to improve athletic performance.
During the stages of long-term athlete development (LTAD), resistance training (RT) is an important means for (i) stimulating athletic development, (ii) tolerating the demands of long-term training and competition, and (iii) inducing long-term health promoting effects that are robust over time and track into adulthood. However, there is a gap in the literature with regards to optimal RT methods during LTAD and how RT is linked to biological age. Thus, the aims of this scoping review were (i) to describe and discuss the effects of RT on muscular fitness and athletic performance in youth athletes, (ii) to introduce a conceptual model on how to appropriately implement different types of RT within LTAD stages, and (iii) to identify research gaps from the existing literature by deducing implications for future research. In general, RT produced small -to -moderate effects on muscular fitness and athletic performance in youth athletes with muscular strength showing the largest improvement. Free weight, complex, and plyometric training appear to be well -suited to improve muscular fitness and athletic performance. In addition, balance training appears to be an important preparatory (facilitating) training program during all stages of LTAD but particularly during the early stages. As youth athletes become more mature, specificity, and intensity of RT methods increase. This scoping review identified research gaps that are summarized in the following and that should be addressed in future studies: (i) to elucidate the influence of gender and biological age on the adaptive potential following RT in youth athletes (especially in females), (ii) to describe RT protocols in more detail (i.e., always report stress and strain based parameters), and (iii) to examine neuromuscular and tendomuscular adaptations following RT in youth athletes.