Blagrove Richard C, Bruinvels Georgie, Pedlar Charles R
School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, United Kingdom.
School of Sport, Health and Applied Science, St Mary's University, Twickenham, United Kingdom; Orreco Ltd, National University of Ireland Business Innovation Centre, Galway, Ireland.
J Sci Med Sport. 2020 Dec;23(12):1220-1227. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.04.022. Epub 2020 May 17.
To systematically review the current body of research that has investigated changes in strength-related variables during different phases of the menstrual cycle in eumenorrheic women.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
A literature search was conducted in Pubmed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science using search terms related to the menstrual cycle and strength-related measures. Two reviewers reached consensus that 21 studies met the criteria for inclusion. Methodological rigour was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Random effects meta-analyses were used to compare the early-follicular, ovulatory and mid-luteal phases for maximal voluntary contraction, isokinetic peak torque, and explosive strength.
The assessment of study quality showed that a high level of bias exists in specific areas of study design. Non-significant and small or trivial effect sizes (p≥0.26, Hedges g≤0.35) were identified for all strength-related variables in each comparison between phases. 95% confidence intervals for each comparison suggested the uncertainty associated with each estimate extends to a small effect on strength performance with unclear direction (-0.42≤g≤0.48). The heterogeneity for each comparison was also small (p≥0.83, I=0%).
Strength-related measures appear to be minimally altered (g≤0.35) by the fluctuations in ovarian sex hormones that occur during the menstrual cycle. This finding should be interpreted with caution due to the methodological shortcomings identified by the quality assessment.
系统回顾当前关于月经周期正常女性在月经周期不同阶段力量相关变量变化的研究。
系统回顾与荟萃分析。
在PubMed、SPORTDiscus和Web of Science数据库中进行文献检索,使用与月经周期和力量相关测量指标相关的检索词。两名评审员达成共识,认为21项研究符合纳入标准。使用观察性队列研究和横断面研究质量评估工具评估方法的严谨性。采用随机效应荟萃分析比较卵泡早期、排卵期和黄体中期的最大自主收缩、等速峰值扭矩和爆发力。
研究质量评估表明,研究设计的特定领域存在高度偏倚。在各阶段之间的每次比较中,所有力量相关变量均显示无显著且效应量小或微不足道(p≥0.26,Hedges g≤0.35)。每次比较的95%置信区间表明,与每个估计值相关的不确定性延伸至对力量表现的微小影响,且方向不明确(-0.42≤g≤0.48)。每次比较的异质性也较小(p≥0.83,I²=0%)。
月经周期中卵巢性激素的波动似乎对力量相关测量指标影响极小(g≤0.35)。由于质量评估发现的方法学缺陷,这一发现应谨慎解读。