Effects of Vertically and Horizontally Orientated Plyometric Training on Physical Performance: A Meta-analytical Compari
- PDF / 1,245,604 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 34 Downloads / 276 Views
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Effects of Vertically and Horizontally Orientated Plyometric Training on Physical Performance: A Meta‑analytical Comparison Jason Moran1 · Rodrigo Ramirez‑Campillo2 · Bernard Liew1 · Helmi Chaabene3,4 · David G. Behm5 · Antonio García‑Hermoso6,7 · Mikel Izquierdo6,8 · Urs Granacher3
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract Background In accordance with the principle of training specificity, adaptations to vertically or horizontally orientated plyometric training (VPT, HPT) directly transfer to athletic tasks that are carried out in the same direction as they are performed. Objectives The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the relative effect of VPT and HPT on both vertical and horizontal measures of physical performance. Data Sources Google Scholar, CrossRef, Microsoft Academic, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus. Study Eligibility Criteria To qualify for inclusion in the meta-analysis, studies must have included a plyometric training intervention that compared jumps executed in a vertical direction [i.e. countermovement jump (CMJ)] to jumps executed in a horizontal direction (i.e. standing horizontal jump). Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods We used the inverse-variance random effects model for meta-analyses. Effect sizes, calculated from measures of horizontally or vertically orientated performance, were represented by the standardised mean difference and presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results For between-group analysis on horizontal outcomes, there was a moderate, significant effect size (ES) in favour of HPT (0.65 [95% CI 0.12, 1.18], Z = 2.41 [p = 0.02]). For the analysis on vertical outcomes, there was a trivial, non-significant difference between VPT and HPT (− 0.04 [95% CI − 0.33, 0.24], Z = 0.0.29 [p = 0.77]). Within-group analysis showed HPT to be superior to VPT across horizontally- (1.05 [0.38, 1.72] vs. 0.84 [0.37, 1.31]) and vertically-orientated (0.74 [0.08, 1.40] vs. 0.72 [0.02, 1.43]) performance measures. For horizontally-orientated outcomes, single-factor moderator analyses showed that longer programmes (> 7 weeks), more sessions (> 12) and combined bilateral and unilateral training were most effective, favouring HPT in each case. In vertically orientated outcomes, these same variables showed only trivial differences between HBT and VBT. Conclusions HPT is at least as effective as VPT at enhancing vertical performance but is superior at enhancing horizontal performance. This means that HPT might be a more efficient method for enhancing multi-vector performance for sport.
1 Introduction The ability of the neuromuscular and musculoskeletal systems to generate force at a specific velocity, in a particular direction, appears to be critical for many sports that involve sprinting, jumping and throwing [1]. In accordance with the principle of training specificity, sport-based demands, which require vertically or horizontally orientated force application, need to be addressed through training stimuli that * Jason
Data Loading...
