Suppr超能文献

基于速度的训练与传统的 1RM 百分比训练对提高力量、跳跃、线性冲刺和变向速度表现的影响:系统评价与荟萃分析。

Effects of velocity based training vs. traditional 1RM percentage-based training on improving strength, jump, linear sprint and change of direction speed performance: A Systematic review with meta-analysis.

机构信息

School of Physical Education and Sport Training, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China.

Department of Strength and Conditioning, Guangdong Vocational Institute of Sport, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0259790. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259790. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There has been a surge of interest on velocity-based training (VBT) in recent years. However, it remains unclear whether VBT is more effective in improving strength, jump, linear sprint and change of direction speed (CODs) than the traditional 1RM percentage-based training (PBT).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the training effects in VBT vs. PBT upon strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs performance.

DATA SOURCES

Web of science, PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI).

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

The qualified studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis must have included a resistance training intervention that compared the effects of VBT and PBT on at least one measure of strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs with participants aged ≥16 yrs. and be written in English or Chinese.

METHODS

The modified Pedro Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects model was used to calculate the effects via the mean change and pre-SD (standard deviation). Mean difference (MD) or Standardized mean difference (SMD) was presented correspondently with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Six studies met the inclusion criteria including a total of 124 participants aged 16 to 30 yrs. The differences of training effects between VBT and PBT were not significant in back squat 1RM (MD = 3.03kg; 95%CI: -3.55, 9.61; I2 = 0%) and load velocity 60%1RM (MD = 0.02m/s; 95%CI: -0.01,0.06; I2 = 0%), jump (SMD = 0.27; 95%CI: -0.15,0.7; I2 = 0%), linear sprint (MD = 0.01s; 95%CI: -0.06, 0.07; I2 = 0%), and CODs (SMD = 0.49; 95%CI: -0.14, 1.07; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Both VBT and PBT can enhance strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs performance effectively without significant group difference.

摘要

背景

近年来,基于速度的训练(VBT)引起了人们的极大兴趣。然而,目前尚不清楚 VBT 是否比传统的 1RM 百分比训练(PBT)更能有效地提高力量、跳跃、线性冲刺和变向速度(CODs)。

目的

比较 VBT 与 PBT 在力量、跳跃、线性冲刺和 CODs 表现方面的训练效果。

数据来源

Web of science、PubMed 和中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)。

研究入选标准

符合纳入标准的研究必须包括一项阻力训练干预措施,该干预措施比较了 VBT 和 PBT 对至少一项力量、跳跃、线性冲刺和 CODs 测量值的影响,参与者年龄≥16 岁,并且以英文或中文书写。

方法

使用改良的 Pedro 量表评估偏倚风险。使用均数变化和预-SD(标准差)通过随机效应模型计算效应。用均值差(MD)或标准化均值差(SMD)对应表示 95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

共有 6 项研究符合纳入标准,共纳入 124 名年龄在 16 至 30 岁的参与者。VBT 和 PBT 之间的训练效果差异在深蹲 1RM(MD=3.03kg;95%CI:-3.55,9.61;I2=0%)和 60%1RM 负荷速度(MD=0.02m/s;95%CI:-0.01,0.06;I2=0%)、跳跃(SMD=0.27;95%CI:-0.15,0.7;I2=0%)、线性冲刺(MD=0.01s;95%CI:-0.06,0.07;I2=0%)和 CODs(SMD=0.49;95%CI:-0.14,1.07;I2=0%)方面均无显著差异。

结论

VBT 和 PBT 均可有效增强力量、跳跃、线性冲刺和 CODs 表现,且组间无显著差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e2e/8601436/c85553b31000/pone.0259790.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验