Suppr超能文献

体育训练计划对健康运动员垂直跳高度的影响:一项荟萃分析的系统评价

Effects of Physical Training Programs on Healthy Athletes' Vertical Jump Height: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Ma Shuzhen, Xu Yanqi, Xu Simao

机构信息

School of Public Administration, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, China.

Department of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.

出版信息

J Sports Sci Med. 2025 Jun 1;24(2):236-257. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2025.236. eCollection 2025 Jun.

Abstract

Various physical training programs are widely used to enhance vertical jump height, but their relative effectiveness remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate effectiveness of four training methods -weight resistance, plyometric, complex, and routine training- on vertical jump height. A comprehensive search of six databases (PubMed, ERIC, Google Scholar, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Scopus) identified relevant studies coded based on training type, modality, and outcome measures. Methodological quality and statistical analysis were assessed using PEDro scale and R (version 4.1.3) with the 'meta' package. Eight studies revealed that plyometric training and weight resistance exercise increased vertical jump by 5.2 cm (95% CI: 2.6, 7.7 cm; I = 4.7%) and 9.9 cm (95% CI: 6.7, 13.5 cm; I = 0.0%), while improved squat jump by 1.5 cm (95% CI: 0.2, 2.6 cm; I = 0.0%) and 3.1 cm (95% CI: 0.2, 2.6 cm; I = 16.9%) compared to routine training. Fifteen studies indicated that plyometric training, weight resistance exercise, and complex training increased countermovement jump by 2.0 cm (95% CI: 1.4, 3.7 cm; I = 0.0%), 2.2 cm (95% CI: 1.4, 3.7 cm; I = 0.0%), and 5.0 cm (95% CI: 2.5, 7.6 cm; I = 0.0%) compared to routine training. Complex training was more effective than weight resistance (2.6 cm; 95% CI: 0.2, 5.5 cm) and plyometric training (2.9 cm; 95% CI: 0.2, 5.8 cm), with no significant difference between weight resistance and plyometric training (0.2 cm; 95% CI: -1.0, 2.0 cm). Heterogeneity was low for most comparisons (I = 0.0% to 16.9%), indicating consistent results across different interventions. This meta-analysis demonstrates that plyometric, weight resistance, and complex training significantly improve vertical, squat, and countermovement jump performance. Weight resistance is effective for vertical and stationary vertical jumps, while complex training is most effective for countermovement jumps.

摘要

各种体育训练项目被广泛用于提高垂直跳跃高度,但其相对有效性仍存在争议。本系统评价和荟萃分析评估了四种训练方法——抗阻训练、增强式训练、综合训练和常规训练——对垂直跳跃高度的有效性。对六个数据库(PubMed、ERIC、谷歌学术、科学网、EBSCOhost和Scopus)进行全面检索,确定了根据训练类型、方式和结果指标编码的相关研究。使用PEDro量表和R(版本4.1.3)及“meta”包评估方法学质量和统计分析。八项研究表明,与常规训练相比,增强式训练和抗阻训练分别使垂直跳跃提高了5.2厘米(95%CI:2.6,7.7厘米;I² = 4.7%)和9.9厘米(95%CI:6.7,13.5厘米;I² = 0.0%),深蹲跳分别提高了1.5厘米(95%CI:0.2,2.6厘米;I² = 0.0%)和3.1厘米(95%CI:0.2,2.6厘米;I² = 16.9%)。十五项研究表明,与常规训练相比,增强式训练、抗阻训练和综合训练分别使反向移动跳提高了2.0厘米(95%CI:1.4,3.7厘米;I² = 0.0%)、2.2厘米(95%CI:1.4,3.7厘米;I² = 0.0%)和5.0厘米(95%CI:2.5,7.6厘米;I² = 0.0%)。综合训练比抗阻训练(提高2.6厘米;95%CI:0.2,5.5厘米)和增强式训练(提高2.9厘米;95%CI:,0.2,5.8厘米)更有效,抗阻训练和增强式训练之间无显著差异(提高0.2厘米;95%CI:-1.0,2.0厘米)。大多数比较的异质性较低(I² = 0.0%至16.9%),表明不同干预措施的结果一致。本荟萃分析表明,增强式训练、抗阻训练和综合训练能显著提高垂直跳、深蹲跳和反向移动跳的表现。抗阻训练对垂直跳和静止垂直跳有效,而综合训练对反向移动跳最有效。

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验