Solberg Paul, Hopkins Will G, Andersen Vidar, Lindberg Kolbjørn, Bjørnsen Thomas, Saeterbakken Atle, Paulsen Gøran
Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports, Oslo, Norway.
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 2;15(1):22468. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-00870-1.
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of training optimized to correct deficits in vertical force-velocity (FV) profiles compared to non-optimized training. Outcomes included changes in the FV profile, vertical jump height, and maximal power. Searches followed PRISMA guidelines and were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus. Study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. As of March 2025, ten studies were identified; four were eligible for meta-analysis. Individually optimized FV-based training partially corrected a force deficit, fully corrected a velocity deficit, and had little effect on an already optimum FV profile. Effects on maximal power were small to trivial and often unclear when compared with non-optimized training. There were small-moderate improvements in jump height with optimized training, but these gains were comparable to non-optimized training. Heterogeneity was small to moderate, and methodological shortcomings were noted in all studies, including those excluded from the meta-analysis. Overall, it remains unclear if FV-profile-based training outperforms standard approaches. Labeling training "optimized" or "non-optimized" may induce placebo or nocebo effects, underscoring the need for blinded, randomized controlled trials.
本系统评价和荟萃分析评估了与非优化训练相比,针对纠正垂直力-速度(FV)曲线缺陷而优化的训练效果。结果包括FV曲线、垂直跳高度和最大功率的变化。检索遵循PRISMA指南,在PubMed、科学网、SPORTDiscus和Scopus中进行。使用PEDro量表评估研究质量。截至2025年3月,共识别出10项研究;其中4项符合荟萃分析的条件。基于FV的个体化优化训练部分纠正了力量缺陷,完全纠正了速度缺陷,而对已经最佳的FV曲线影响不大。与非优化训练相比,对最大功率的影响较小或微不足道,且往往不明确。优化训练使跳高度有小到中等程度的提高,但这些提升与非优化训练相当。异质性为小到中等,所有研究(包括被排除在荟萃分析之外的研究)均存在方法学缺陷。总体而言,基于FV曲线的训练是否优于标准方法仍不明确。将训练标记为“优化”或“非优化”可能会引发安慰剂或反安慰剂效应,这突出了进行盲法随机对照试验的必要性。