Zhang Zefeng, Xu Jianhua, Ji Xiangbo, Chen Rui
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou, China.
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025 Jun 3;17(1):142. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01184-5.
As a type of game-based training (GBT), small-sided games (SSGs) are often compared with non-game-based training (NGBT) in team sports. However, there is still no consensus on the chronic effects between SSGs and NGBT, including high intensity interval training (HIIT) and traditional technical drills (TTD), on physical performance in basketball players.
To systematically compare the chronic effects of SSGs versus NGBT on the physical fitness in basketball players through meta-analysis and to explore the moderator effects of training variables in SSGs.
A systematic search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO host, and CNKI, covering the period from inception until December 13, 2023, with last updated on April 14, 2025. The meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, publication bias detection and subgroup analysis were mainly conducted by Review Manager 5.3. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by the PEDro scale and the NOS scale.
A total of 10 studies involving 253 subjects were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that: (1) No statistically significant differences were found between SSGs and NGBT for the improvement on aerobic and COD performance in basketball players (P > 0.05). And significantly higher enhancement of the lower limb explosive performance were found in SSGs compared with NGBT (SMD = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.20 to 0.82; P = 0.001). (2) Subgroup analysis revealed that SSGs programs favored a weekly training frequency ≥ 3 sessions (SMD = 0.60, 95%CI:0.08 to 1.13) in the improvement of aerobic performance and participants aged < 18 (SMD = 0.56, 95%CI:0.17 to 0.96) or training duration < 18.8 (SMD = 0.60, 95%CI:0.20 to 0.99) in the improvement of lower limb explosive performance. In addition, a higher enhancement of the lower limb explosive performance was found in SSGs versus TTD compared to SSGs versus HIIT (SMD = 0.78, 95%CI:0.33 to 1.22).
The evidence indicated that SSGs are as effective as NGBT for increasing aerobic and COD performance, and SSGs are more effective than NGBT for improving lower limb explosive performance in basketball players. Moreover, it is important to consider the influence of moderator variables such as weekly training frequency, age of participants and training duration when designing the SSGs programs. The findings provide consensus on the training effects of physical fitness between SSGs and NGBT, and offer directions for further research on optimal SSGs programs.
This study was registered with PROSPERO (ID. CRD42023483633).
作为一种基于游戏的训练（GBT），小型比赛（SSGs）在团队运动中常与非游戏训练（NGBT）进行比较。然而，关于SSGs与NGBT（包括高强度间歇训练（HIIT）和传统技术训练（TTD））对篮球运动员身体机能的长期影响，目前仍未达成共识。
通过荟萃分析系统比较SSGs与NGBT对篮球运动员身体素质的长期影响，并探讨SSGs中训练变量的调节作用。
在包括PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、EBSCO host和CNKI在内的数据库中进行系统检索，涵盖从数据库建立至2023年12月13日的时间段，并于2025年4月14日进行最后更新。荟萃分析、敏感性分析、发表偏倚检测和亚组分析主要通过Review Manager 5.3进行。纳入研究的方法学质量通过PEDro量表和NOS量表进行评估。
共纳入10项研究，涉及253名受试者。荟萃分析结果表明：（1）在提高篮球运动员有氧和COD机能方面，SSGs与NGBT之间未发现统计学显著差异（P>0.05）。与NGBT相比，SSGs在提高下肢爆发力方面有显著更高的提升（标准化均数差（SMD）=0.51，95%置信区间（CI）：0.20至0.82；P=0.001）。（2）亚组分析显示，SSGs方案在提高有氧机能方面有利于每周训练频率≥3次（SMD=0.60，95%CI：0.08至1.13），在提高下肢爆发力方面有利于年龄<18岁的参与者（SMD=0.56，95%CI：0.17至0.96）或训练时长<18.8的参与者（SMD=0.60，95%CI：0.20至0.99）。此外，与SSGs对比HIIT相比，SSGs对比TTD在提高下肢爆发力方面有更高的提升（SMD=0.78，95%CI：0.33至1.22）。
证据表明，在提高有氧和COD机能方面，SSGs与NGBT同样有效，在提高篮球运动员下肢爆发力方面，SSGs比NGBT更有效。此外，在设计SSGs方案时，考虑每周训练频率、参与者年龄和训练时长等调节变量的影响很重要。这些发现为SSGs与NGBT在身体素质训练效果方面提供了共识，并为进一步研究最佳SSGs方案提供了方向。
本研究已在PROSPERO注册（注册号：CRD42023483633）。
