Swanik Kathleen A, Thomas Stephen J, Struminger Aaron H, Bliven Kellie C Huxel, Kelly John D, Swanik Charles B
J Sport Rehabil. 2016 Dec;25(4):315-323. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2015-0005. Epub 2016 Aug 24.
Plyometric training is credited with providing benefits in performance and dynamic restraint. However, limited prospective data exist quantifying kinematic adaptations such as amortization time, glenohumeral rotation, and scapulothoracic position, which may underlie the efficacy of plyometric training for upper-extremity rehabilitation or performance enhancement.
To measure upper-extremity kinematics and plyometric phase times before and after an 8-wk upper-extremity strength- and plyometric-training program.
Randomized pretest-posttest design.
Research laboratory.
40 recreationally active men (plyometric group, age 20.43 ± 1.40 y, height 180.00 ± 8.80 cm, weight 73.07 ± 7.21 kg; strength group, age 21.95 ± 3.40 y, height 173.98 ± 11.91 cm, weight 74.79 ± 13.55 kg).
Participants were randomly assigned to either a strength-training group or a strength- and plyometric-training group. Each participant performed the assigned training for 8 wk.
Dynamic and static glenohumeral and scapular-rotation measurements were taken before and after the training programs. Dynamic measurement of scapular rotation and time spent in each plyometric phase (concentric, eccentric, and amortization) during a ball-toss exercise were recorded while the subjects were fitted with an electromagnetic tracking system. Static measures included scapular upward rotation at 3 different glenohumeral-abduction angles, glenohumeral internal rotation, and glenohumeral external rotation.
Posttesting showed that both groups significantly decreased the time spent in the amortization, concentric, and eccentric phases of a ball-toss exercise (P < .01). Both groups also exhibited significantly decreased static external rotation and increased dynamic scapular upward rotation after the training period (P < .01). The only difference between the training protocols was that the plyometric-training group exhibited an increase in internal rotation that was not present in the strength-training group (P < .01).
These findings support the use of both upper-extremity plyometrics and strength training for reducing commonly identified upper-extremity-injury risk factors and improving upper-extremity performance.
增强式训练被认为对运动表现和动态约束有益。然而，量化诸如缓冲时间、盂肱关节旋转和肩胛胸壁位置等运动学适应的前瞻性数据有限，而这些可能是增强式训练对上肢康复或提高运动表现有效性的基础。
测量8周上肢力量和增强式训练计划前后的上肢运动学和增强式训练阶段时间。
随机前测-后测设计。
研究实验室。
40名休闲活跃男性（增强式训练组，年龄20.43±1.40岁，身高180.00±8.80厘米，体重73.07±7.21千克；力量训练组，年龄21.95±3.40岁，身高173.98±11.91厘米，体重74.79±13.55千克）。
参与者被随机分配到力量训练组或力量和增强式训练组。每位参与者进行指定训练8周。
在训练计划前后进行动态和静态盂肱关节及肩胛旋转测量。在受试者佩戴电磁跟踪系统时，记录抛球运动期间肩胛旋转的动态测量以及每个增强式训练阶段（向心、离心和缓冲）所花费的时间。静态测量包括在3个不同盂肱外展角度下的肩胛上旋、盂肱内旋和盂肱外旋。
后测显示，两组在抛球运动的缓冲、向心和离心阶段所花费的时间均显著减少（P<.01）。两组在训练期后还表现出静态外旋显著减少，动态肩胛上旋增加（P<.01）。训练方案之间的唯一差异是，增强式训练组出现了力量训练组未出现的内旋增加（P<.01）。
这些发现支持使用上肢增强式训练和力量训练来降低常见的上肢损伤风险因素并改善上肢运动表现。
