Department of Human Performance and Physical Education, Adams State University, Alamosa, Colorado; and.
Sports Performance Research Institute New Zealand, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
J Strength Cond Res. 2021 Nov 1;35(11):3097-3103. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003303.
Oranchuk, DJ, Ecsedy, EN, and Robinson, TL. Effects of a sport-specific upper-body resistance-band training program on overhead throwing velocity and glenohumeral joint range of motion. J Strength Cond Res 35(11): 3097-3103, 2021-Practitioners seek optimal, yet practical means to enhance performance while aiming to minimize injury risk. Resistance bands offer portability and safety and enable similar movements to competition. However, the effect of movement-specific resistance-band training on throwing performance and markers of injury risk has yet to be elucidated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a resistance training program using resistance bands with sport-specific (SS), or general-training (GT) exercises. Twenty-eight collegiate female softball players were randomly allocated to an SS (n = 15) or GT (n = 13) 8-week resistance-band program. Dependent variables included peak and mean throwing velocity, 1 repetition maximum (1RM) cable Chop-test, and glenohumeral internal and external rotation range of motion (ROM). No significant (p ≤ 0.338) differences were found between groups at baseline. Improvements in peak (p = 0.006, 4.9%, effect size [ES] = 0.61) and mean (p = 0.004, 3.1%, ES = 0.49) throwing velocity were seen after SS training, while the 1RM Chop-test increased in both SS (p < 0.001, 23.5%, ES = 1.06) and GT (p = 0.049, 26.1%, ES = 0.57) groups. However, no between-group differences (p ≥ 0.109, ES ≤ 0.17) were present in any variable. Neither the Chop-test nor shoulder internal or external ROM had more than moderate correlations with throwing velocity (r ≤ 0.30, p ≥ 0.119). Therefore, practitioners should not depend solely on SS resistance-band training when aiming to improve throwing velocity or measures of shoulder rotational health. However, resistance bands appear to be a practical alternative when traditional means of resistance training are not available. In addition, strength and conditioning coaches should not use the Chop-test or shoulder ROM to predict throwing performance.
奥朗丘克、Ecsedy、EN 和罗宾逊 TL。一项特定于上肢的阻力带训练计划对过顶投掷速度和盂肱关节活动范围的影响。J 强能力研究 35(11):3097-3103,2021 年——从业者寻求最佳但实用的方法来提高表现,同时旨在将受伤风险降至最低。阻力带具有便携性和安全性,可以进行类似于比赛的运动。然而,特定于运动的阻力带训练对投掷表现和受伤风险指标的影响尚未阐明。因此,本研究的目的是比较使用阻力带的阻力训练计划与特定运动(SS)或一般训练(GT)运动的效果。28 名大学女子垒球运动员被随机分配到 SS(n = 15)或 GT(n = 13)8 周阻力带计划。依赖变量包括峰值和平均投掷速度、1 次重复最大(1RM)电缆 Chop 测试和盂肱关节内旋和外旋活动范围(ROM)。在基线时,两组之间没有发现显著差异(p≤0.338)。SS 训练后,峰值(p=0.006,4.9%,效果大小[ES]=0.61)和平均(p=0.004,3.1%,ES=0.49)投掷速度均有提高,而 1RM Chop 测试在 SS(p<0.001,23.5%,ES=1.06)和 GT(p=0.049,26.1%,ES=0.57)组中均有增加。然而,任何变量之间都没有组间差异(p≥0.109,ES≤0.17)。Chop 测试或肩部内旋或外旋 ROM 与投掷速度的相关性均不强(r≤0.30,p≥0.119)。因此,从业者在旨在提高投掷速度或肩部旋转健康指标时,不应仅依赖特定于 SS 的阻力带训练。然而,当无法使用传统的阻力训练方法时,阻力带似乎是一种实用的替代方法。此外,力量和体能教练不应使用 Chop 测试或肩部 ROM 来预测投掷表现。