Cao JianChun, Xun SiHang, Zhang Rui, Zhang ZhaoJin
Physical Education and Health Education, Udon Thani Rajabhat University, Thailand.
Wannan Medical College, Anhui, China.
J Sports Sci Med. 2024 Dec 1;23(4):754-766. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2024.754. eCollection 2024 Dec.
This study aimed to compare the effects of unilateral (UT), bilateral (BT), and combined (UBT) plyometric training on muscular strength, power, and change-of-direction performance in youth male basketball players. Sixty-six male youth basketball players (age: 16.1 ± 0.8 years) participated in this randomized experimental study, which lasted 8 weeks with a training frequency of 2 sessions per week. The UT group performed only single-leg plyometric exercises, while the BT group conducted similar plyometric drills using both feet. The UBT group combined both approaches, performing one session of UT and one session of BT each week. The players were evaluated at baseline and after the 8-week period using a force platform for the unilateral countermovement jump test (UCMJ), isometric squat test (IST), isometric knee flexor strength test (KFS), leg land and hold test (LHT), and 5-0-5 tests. The asymmetry between legs per outcome was measured using the symmetry angle. The UT, BT, and UBT all significantly improved outcomes in the IST, UCMJ, KFS, LHT, and 5-0-5 tests (p < 0.05) following the intervention, with no significant differences among the three methods. However, while UT and UBT significantly reduced asymmetries in the tests (p < 0.05), BT increased asymmetries. Only, the UT group showed significant improvements over the control group in asymmetry measures: IST asymmetry (mean difference: 1.2%, p = 0.049), KFS asymmetry (mean difference: 2.5%, p < 0.001), and LHT asymmetry (mean difference: 1.1%, p = 0.013). While there are no substantial differences among UT, BT, and UBT in terms of improvements in unilateral tests and symmetry levels, UT stands out for its effectiveness in enhancing neuromuscular performance and reducing asymmetries among basketball players compared to the control condition. UT was the only method that showed significant benefits in this context. Strength and conditioning coaches might consider incorporating UT, either alone or alongside BT, to optimize individual limb strength and coordination.
本研究旨在比较单侧(UT)、双侧(BT)和联合(UBT)等距训练对青年男性篮球运动员肌肉力量、功率和变向能力的影响。66名青年男性篮球运动员(年龄:16.1±0.8岁)参与了这项随机实验研究,该研究为期8周,每周训练频率为2次。UT组仅进行单腿等距练习,而BT组用双脚进行类似的等距训练。UBT组结合了两种方法,每周进行一次UT训练和一次BT训练。在基线和8周训练期结束后,使用测力平台对运动员进行评估,测试项目包括单侧反向跳测试(UCMJ)、等距深蹲测试(IST)、等距屈膝力量测试(KFS)、腿部落地保持测试(LHT)和5-0-5测试。使用对称角测量每个结果的双腿之间的不对称性。干预后,UT、BT和UBT在IST、UCMJ、KFS、LHT和5-0-5测试中的结果均有显著改善(p<0.05),三种方法之间无显著差异。然而,虽然UT和UBT在测试中显著降低了不对称性(p<0.05),但BT增加了不对称性。只有UT组在不对称性测量方面比对照组有显著改善:IST不对称性(平均差异:1.2%,p=0.049)、KFS不对称性(平均差异:2.5%,p<0.001)和LHT不对称性(平均差异:1.1%,p=0.013)。虽然UT、BT和UBT在单侧测试的改善和对称水平方面没有实质性差异,但与对照条件相比,UT在提高篮球运动员神经肌肉性能和减少不对称性方面的有效性较为突出。UT是在这方面唯一显示出显著益处的方法。力量和体能教练可能会考虑单独或与BT一起采用UT,以优化个体肢体力量和协调性。