Kukić Filip, Zlojutro Nemanja, Paspalj Darko, Bajić Senka, Kovačević Saša, Vulin Lazar, Rađević Nenad, Koropanovski Nenad
Biomechanics Laboratory, Faculty of Physical Education and Sports, University of Banja Luka, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Faculty of Security Sciences, University of Banja Luka, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2024 Oct 13;9(4):194. doi: 10.3390/jfmk9040194.
This study assessed the effects of two distinct RAMP (Raise, Activate, Mobilize, Potentiate) protocols, mobility-focused and reactiveness-focused, on change of direction speed in police students (i.e., tactical athletes). A longitudinal design with two experimental and one control group was employed. The study sample consisted of 39 police students (aged 19.2 ± 0.2 yrs) who were randomly allocated into three equal groups of 13 participants (7 females and 6 males). Experimental groups were labeled as the mobility group or reactiveness group based on the type of RAMP protocol they performed. During the tactical physical education classes, the mobility group performed four complex mobility exercises, while the reactiveness group performed four exercises for trunk reactiveness. After the specific warm-up, both groups continued with syllabus activities. The control group performed only regular activities based on the study syllabus. All participants performed the Illinois Agility test unloaded (IAT) and loaded (10 kg vest [IATL]) and Functional Movement Screening (FMS) before and after 8 weeks of the applied protocols. In general, improvements were observed across all participants in the IAT ( < 0.001), IATL ( < 0.001), and FMS ( < 0.001). The mobility protocol had a more substantial impact compared to the reactiveness protocol on the IAT (d = 0.55 vs. d = 0.40), IATL (d = 0.44 vs. d = 0.38), and FMS (d = 0.88 vs. d = -0.42). Additionally, the control group, which did not follow either RAMP protocol, did not show significant improvements. These results underscore the importance of incorporating targeted mobility training in the limited time available for strength and conditioning programs, as it improves occupationally relevant movement qualities such as change of direction speed ability. Prioritizing mobility training in young tactical athletes may offer broader benefits compared to reactiveness training.
本研究评估了两种不同的RAMP(提升、激活、动员、增强)方案,即以移动性为重点和以反应性为重点的方案,对警察学员(即战术运动员)变向速度的影响。采用了包含两个实验组和一个对照组的纵向设计。研究样本包括39名警察学员(年龄19.2±0.2岁),他们被随机分为三组,每组13名参与者(7名女性和6名男性)。实验组根据他们所执行的RAMP方案类型被标记为移动性组或反应性组。在战术体育课上,移动性组进行四项复杂的移动性练习,而反应性组进行四项针对躯干反应性的练习。在进行特定的热身活动后,两组继续进行教学大纲规定的活动。对照组仅根据研究教学大纲进行常规活动。在应用方案8周前后,所有参与者都进行了无负重的伊利诺伊敏捷性测试(IAT)和负重(10公斤背心[IATL])以及功能性动作筛查(FMS)。总体而言,所有参与者在IAT(<0.001)、IATL(<0.001)和FMS(<0.001)方面都有改善。与反应性方案相比,移动性方案对IAT(d = 0.55 vs. d = 0.40)、IATL(d = 0.44 vs. d = 0.38)和FMS(d = 0.88 vs. d = -0.42)的影响更大。此外,未遵循任何一种RAMP方案的对照组没有显示出显著改善。这些结果强调了在力量和体能训练计划的有限时间内纳入有针对性的移动性训练的重要性,因为它可以提高与职业相关的运动素质,如变向速度能力。与反应性训练相比,在年轻战术运动员中优先进行移动性训练可能会带来更广泛的益处。