Chen Zhengxiang, Wang Jinghui, Zhao Kewei, He Guangze
China Institute of Sport Science, Beijing, China.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2025 May 21;13(5):23259671251331134. doi: 10.1177/23259671251331134. eCollection 2025 May.
Injury prevention is very important for athletes, and studies have been carried out to better inform effective means of injury prevention. Strength training has long been recognized as important for preventing sports injuries. But until now, there has been debate about the proper application of strength training to prevent injuries, especially for different types of injury.
To compare the effects of single-component and multicomponent strength training on the prevention of different types of injuries and to provide reference for the future design of injury prevention programs (IPPs).
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.
Five databases were searched in August 2024. The main inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials on use of an IPP that included strength training with a primary outcome of sports injury rate. The initial search resulted in 3583 articles, which were filtered to 16 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Extracted data were subjected to meta-analysis using a random-effects model, and subanalysis was carried out to explore the efficacy of different component strength IPPs in mitigating injuries at different locations in the body.
The pooled results based on total injuries showed that strength IPPs had a statistically significant reduction in injury relative risk (RR) of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60-0.82). Subgroup analysis showed that single-component strength training significantly reduced groin injuries (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.93) and hamstring injuries (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.25-0.55). In addition, multicomponent strength training significantly reduced knee injuries (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.98) and ankle injuries (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.89).
This study demonstrates that different-component strength IPPs have differential preventive effects on sports injury because of different target sites. The reason may be that the anatomic structure and motor function of the target sites are different. We can determine the vulnerable locations according to the different characteristics of the sports and select different component strength IPPs according to the characteristics of the target sites.
CRD42023478807 (PROSPERO).
预防损伤对运动员非常重要，并且已经开展了多项研究以更好地了解有效的损伤预防方法。长期以来，力量训练一直被认为对预防运动损伤很重要。但直到现在，关于力量训练在预防损伤方面的正确应用，尤其是针对不同类型损伤的应用，一直存在争议。
比较单组分和多组分力量训练对预防不同类型损伤的效果，并为未来损伤预防计划（IPP）的设计提供参考。
系统评价；证据等级，1级。
于2024年8月检索了5个数据库。主要纳入标准为关于使用包含力量训练的IPP的随机对照试验，其主要结局为运动损伤率。初步检索得到3583篇文章，经筛选后得到16篇符合纳入标准的文章。对提取的数据采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析，并进行亚组分析以探讨不同组分力量IPP在减轻身体不同部位损伤方面的疗效。
基于所有损伤的汇总结果显示，力量IPP使损伤相对风险（RR）在统计学上显著降低，为0.70（95%CI，0.60 - 0.82）。亚组分析表明，单组分力量训练显著降低了腹股沟损伤（RR，0.69；95%CI，0.51 - 0.93）和腘绳肌损伤（RR，0.37；95%CI，0.25 - 0.55）。此外，多组分力量训练显著降低了膝关节损伤（RR，0.71；95%CI，0.51 - 0.98）和踝关节损伤（RR，0.68；95%CI，0.52 - 0.89）。
本研究表明，不同组分的力量IPP由于目标部位不同，对运动损伤具有不同的预防效果。原因可能是目标部位的解剖结构和运动功能不同。我们可以根据运动的不同特点确定易损伤部位，并根据目标部位的特点选择不同组分的力量IPP。
CRD42023478807（PROSPERO）
