Centre for Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
NUPEF, NUPEF - Núcleo de Pesquisa e Estudos em Futebol, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Int J Sports Med. 2020 Oct;41(11):720-728. doi: 10.1055/a-1157-9078. Epub 2020 May 12.
The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of exercise programs using agility ladders and to assess the quality of available evidence. Search was conducted in October of 2019 using the following databases: Cochrane Library, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Study eligibility criteria included randomized trials or randomized controlled trials using agility ladders drills. Participants were healthy humans of any health status. The study appraisal and synthesis methods followed the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and a qualitative synthesis of the main results of each study were applied. Only five studies met our criteria, lasting between 4 and 8 weeks. Only two studies evaluated the effects of ladder drills on more than one dimension. Lack of description of the specific exercises that were used limits reproducibility of current studies. With one exception, the articles had low risk of bias for most domains. Despite the widespread popularity of agility ladder drills, research is scarce and problematic, with poorly described protocols and mostly unidimensional performance measures. Claims that agility ladders improve agility and other physical skills is premature, given the nature and quality of existing research.
本次系统评价的目的是评估使用敏捷梯的运动方案的效果,并评估现有证据的质量。检索于 2019 年 10 月进行,使用了以下数据库:Cochrane 图书馆、PEDro、PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science。研究纳入标准包括使用敏捷梯训练的随机试验或随机对照试验。参与者为任何健康状况的健康人类。研究评估和综合方法遵循修订后的 Cochrane 随机试验偏倚风险工具(RoB 2),并对每项研究的主要结果进行定性综合。只有五项研究符合我们的标准,持续时间为 4 至 8 周。只有两项研究评估了梯式训练对多个维度的影响。由于缺乏对所使用的特定练习的描述,因此限制了当前研究的可重复性。除了一篇文章外,大多数文章在大多数领域的偏倚风险都较低。尽管敏捷梯训练非常流行,但研究却很少且存在问题,研究方案描述不佳,且主要采用单维度的绩效测量。鉴于现有研究的性质和质量,断言敏捷梯可以提高敏捷性和其他身体技能还为时过早。