Scholarlink

Background <p>Plyometric training is a commonly employed method to enhance explosive strength in athletes. However, to date, no study has provided a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of the effects of unilateral (UNI) versus bilateral (BI) plyometric training.</p> Objectives <p>This meta-analysis investigates the impact of UNI and BI plyometric training on jumping, sprinting, and Change of Direction (COD) abilities.</p> Study eligibility criteria <p>To be eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis, the study had to be:(1)healthy individuals; (2)UNI and BI plyometric training ; (3)conducted on rigid surfaces; (4)the outcome indicators were jumping ability, sprinting, and change of direction ability; (5)randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p> Study appraisal and synthesis methods <p>We used the random-effects model for meta-analyses. Effect sizes (standardized mean difference), calculated from measures of horizontally oriented performance, were represented by the standardized mean difference and presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p> Data sources <p>PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, CNKI and Google Scholar.</p> Results <p>A total of 11&#xa0;papers met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that UNI contrast training was more effective than BI contrast training in improving single-leg jump performance (ES = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.02–1.04; Z = 2.05, <i>p</i> = 0.04), double-legs jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.23–0.09; Z = 0.88, <i>p</i> = 0.38),sprint&#xa0;performance&#xa0;(ES = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07–-0.01; Z = 2.32, <i>p</i> = 0.02), as well as COD&#xa0;(ES = − 0.08, 95% CI: − 0.12 to − 0.03; Z = 3.29, <i>p</i> = 0.001 &lt; 0.01). Conversely, BI contrast training showed a greater effect on bilateral jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.12–-0.03; Z = 3.39, <i>p</i> = 0.0007). Training with low-ground-contact frequencies (LGCF, fewer than 900 contacts) was found to significantly enhance vertical jump performance (ES = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.01–1.27; Z = 2.00, <i>p</i> = 0.05).</p> Conclusions <p>UNI and BI plyometric training offer modality-specific benefits for enhancing single-leg jumping, sprinting, and COD performance, whereas BI is more effective for optimizing bilateral jump performance. The LGCF protocol significantly enhances vertical jump performance.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effect of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on jumping, sprinting, and change of direction abilities: a meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月25日

查看全文
  • Zhanming Zhang,
  • Wenhao Qu,
  • Wuwen Peng,
  • Jian Sun,
  • Jiyang Yue,
  • Lingju Guan,
  • Min Lu,
  • Duanying Li

摘要

Background

Plyometric training is a commonly employed method to enhance explosive strength in athletes. However, to date, no study has provided a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of the effects of unilateral (UNI) versus bilateral (BI) plyometric training.

Objectives

This meta-analysis investigates the impact of UNI and BI plyometric training on jumping, sprinting, and Change of Direction (COD) abilities.

Study eligibility criteria

To be eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis, the study had to be:(1)healthy individuals; (2)UNI and BI plyometric training ; (3)conducted on rigid surfaces; (4)the outcome indicators were jumping ability, sprinting, and change of direction ability; (5)randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

We used the random-effects model for meta-analyses. Effect sizes (standardized mean difference), calculated from measures of horizontally oriented performance, were represented by the standardized mean difference and presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Data sources

PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, CNKI and Google Scholar.

Results

A total of 11 papers met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that UNI contrast training was more effective than BI contrast training in improving single-leg jump performance (ES = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.02–1.04; Z = 2.05, p = 0.04), double-legs jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.23–0.09; Z = 0.88, p = 0.38),sprint performance (ES = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07–-0.01; Z = 2.32, p = 0.02), as well as COD (ES = − 0.08, 95% CI: − 0.12 to − 0.03; Z = 3.29, p = 0.001 < 0.01). Conversely, BI contrast training showed a greater effect on bilateral jump performance (ES = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.12–-0.03; Z = 3.39, p = 0.0007). Training with low-ground-contact frequencies (LGCF, fewer than 900 contacts) was found to significantly enhance vertical jump performance (ES = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.01–1.27; Z = 2.00, p = 0.05).

Conclusions

UNI and BI plyometric training offer modality-specific benefits for enhancing single-leg jumping, sprinting, and COD performance, whereas BI is more effective for optimizing bilateral jump performance. The LGCF protocol significantly enhances vertical jump performance.