Zhang Zhanming, Qu Wenhao, Peng Wuwen, Sun Jian, Yue Jiyang, Guan Lingju, Lu Min, Li Duanying
Graduate School, Guangzhou Sport University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
School of Athletic Training, Guangzhou Sport University, No.1268 Guangzhou Avenue Central, Tianhe District, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510500, China.
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025 Apr 25;17(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01113-6.
Plyometric training is a commonly employed method to enhance explosive strength in athletes. However, to date, no study has provided a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of the effects of unilateral (UNI) versus bilateral (BI) plyometric training.
This meta-analysis investigates the impact of UNI and BI plyometric training on jumping, sprinting, and Change of Direction (COD) abilities.
To be eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis, the study had to be:(1)healthy individuals; (2)UNI and BI plyometric training ; (3)conducted on rigid surfaces; (4)the outcome indicators were jumping ability, sprinting, and change of direction ability; (5)randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
We used the random-effects model for meta-analyses. Effect sizes (standardized mean difference), calculated from measures of horizontally oriented performance, were represented by the standardized mean difference and presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (CI).
PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, CNKI and Google Scholar.
A total of 11 papers met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that UNI contrast training was more effective than BI contrast training in improving single-leg jump performance (ES = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.02-1.04; Z = 2.05, p = 0.04), double-legs jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.23-0.09; Z = 0.88, p = 0.38),sprint performance (ES = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07--0.01; Z = 2.32, p = 0.02), as well as COD (ES = - 0.08, 95% CI: - 0.12 to - 0.03; Z = 3.29, p = 0.001 < 0.01). Conversely, BI contrast training showed a greater effect on bilateral jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.12--0.03; Z = 3.39, p = 0.0007). Training with low-ground-contact frequencies (LGCF, fewer than 900 contacts) was found to significantly enhance vertical jump performance (ES = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.01-1.27; Z = 2.00, p = 0.05).
UNI and BI plyometric training offer modality-specific benefits for enhancing single-leg jumping, sprinting, and COD performance, whereas BI is more effective for optimizing bilateral jump performance. The LGCF protocol significantly enhances vertical jump performance.
增强式训练是提高运动员爆发力的常用方法。然而,迄今为止,尚无研究对单侧(UNI)与双侧(BI)增强式训练的效果进行全面系统的评估。
本荟萃分析旨在研究单侧和双侧增强式训练对跳跃、短跑和变向(COD)能力的影响。
纳入荟萃分析的研究需满足以下条件:(1)健康个体;(2)单侧和双侧增强式训练;(3)在硬质地面进行;(4)结果指标为跳跃能力、短跑和变向能力;(5)随机对照试验(RCT)。
我们采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。从水平方向表现测量值计算得出的效应量(标准化均值差)以标准化均值差表示,并给出95%置信区间(CI)。
PubMed、科学网、Scopus、ProQuest、中国知网和谷歌学术。
共有11篇论文符合纳入标准。荟萃分析显示,在提高单腿跳跃成绩方面,单侧对比训练比双侧对比训练更有效(效应量=0.53,95%CI:0.02 - 1.04;Z = 2.05,p = 0.04);在双腿跳跃成绩方面(效应量=-0.07,95%CI:-0.23 - 0.09;Z = 0.88,p = 0.38);在短跑成绩方面(效应量=-0.04,95%CI:-0.07 - -0.01;Z = 2.32,p = 0.02);以及在变向能力方面(效应量=-0.08,95%CI:-0.12至-0.03;Z = 3.29,p = 0.001 < 0.01)。相反,双侧对比训练对双侧跳跃成绩的影响更大(效应量=-0.07,95%CI:-0.12 - -0.03;Z = 3.39,p = 0.0007)。发现低地面接触频率(LGCF,少于900次接触)训练可显著提高垂直跳跃成绩(效应量=0.64,95%CI:0.01 - 1.27;Z = 2.00,p = 0.05)。
单侧和双侧增强式训练在提高单腿跳跃、短跑和变向能力方面具有特定方式的益处,而双侧训练在优化双侧跳跃成绩方面更有效。低地面接触频率方案可显著提高垂直跳跃成绩。