Search

The aims of this scoping review were (i) to characterize the main methodological approaches to assessing individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (ii) to assess the use of traditional arbitrary (absolute) thresholds compared to individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (iii) to provide an evidence gap map (EGM) about the approaches and study designs employed in investigations in team sports and (iv) to provide directions for future research and practical applications for the strength and conditioning field. Methods studies were searched for in the following databases: (i) PubMed; (ii) Scopus; (iii) SPORTDiscus and (iv) Web of Science. The search was conducted on 15/07/2022. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS). From 3,195 potentially relevant articles, 36 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Of the 36 included articles, 27 (75%) focused on the use of arbitrary and individualized running speed thresholds to describe the locomotor demands (e.g., high intensity running) of players. Thirty-four articles used individualized speed running thresholds based on physical fitness assessments (e.g., 40-m linear sprint) or physical performance (e.g., maximal acceleration). This scoping review supported the need for a greater focus to be placed on improving the methodological aspects of using individualized speed running thresholds in team sports. More than just creating alternatives to arbitrary thresholds, it is essential to increase the replicability of methodological conditions whilst ensuring that research comparing the most adequate measures and approaches to individualization takes into consideration the population and context of each study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this scoping review were (i) to characterize the main methodological approaches to assessing individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (ii) to assess the use of traditional arbitrary (absolute) thresholds compared to individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (iii) to provide an evidence gap map (EGM) about the approaches and study designs employed in investigations in team sports and (iv) to provide directions for future research and practical applications for the strength and conditioning field. Methods studies were searched for in the following databases: (i) PubMed; (ii) Scopus; (iii) SPORTDiscus and (iv) Web of Science. The search was conducted on 15/07/2022. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS). From 3,195 potentially relevant articles, 36 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Of the 36 included articles, 27 (75%) focused on the use of arbitrary and individualized running speed thresholds to describe the locomotor demands (e.g., high intensity running) of players. Thirty-four articles used individualized speed running thresholds based on physical fitness assessments (e.g., 40-m linear sprint) or physical performance (e.g., maximal acceleration). This scoping review supported the need for a greater focusto be placed on improving the methodological aspects of using individualized speed running thresholds in team sports. More than just creating alternatives to arbitrary thresholds, it is essential to increase the replicability of methodological conditions whilst ensuring that research comparing the most adequate measures and approaches to individualization takes into consideration the population and context of each study.

Purpose Arterial stiffness (AS) describes the mechanical properties of the arterial wall and predicts cardiovascular health. Even if it is known that AS is improved by aerobic exercise, the effects of resistance training (RT) are less clear. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of RT on AS. Methods A systematic search for randomized controlled trials published until October 2020 was performed in the PubMed, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Overall, 19 studies were selected, with 12.58 ± 0.82 methodological quality points (from a total 15 points) and a total of 626 participants. Results No significant long-term effect was noted for RT on AS ( ES = –0.07; 95% CI: –0.59 to 0.45; p = 0.789). However, RT induced a significant acute increase in AS ( ES = 1.07; 95% CI: 1.55 to 0.59; p < 0.001). No other factors (i.e., age, gender, AS measurement, upper- vs. lower-body RT, training intensity, duration, frequency) had a significant modifying effect on AS in acute or long-term interventions. Conclusions Although RT induces an acute AS increase, this effect has no long-term impact, irrespective of the participant’s age, sex, or RT variables, such as intensity. However, the clinical implications of acute AS increase after RT are unknown.

One of the most often-used task constraints in designing small-sided games (SSGs) is the manipulation of pitch size to promote increases or decreases in the relative area per player. Such adjustments cause changes in the acute responses during SSGs. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of smaller vs. larger pitch sizes on soccer players' physiological, physical, technical, and tactical responses during SSGs. Comparisons between smaller and larger pitches were not considered based on a specific size, but also between using at least two dimensions in the same comparative study, aiming to understand differences between using smaller and larger (independently of the specific dimensions). The data sources utilized were PubMed, PsycINFO, Scielo, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. The database search initially yielded 249 titles. From those, 41 articles were eligible for the systematic review and meta-analysis. Results revealed that, compared to smaller pitches, SSGs played on larger pitches induced greater values for heart rate (p < 0.001; ES = 0.50), rate of perceived exertion (p < 0.001; ES = 0.70), total distance (p < 0.001; ES = 1.95), high-speed running (p < 0.001; ES = 1.20), stretch index (p < 0.001; ES = 1.02) and surface area (p < 0.001; ES = 1.54). No significant differences were found between pitch size regarding the numbers of accelerations (p = 0.232; ES = 0.45), decelerations (p = 0.111; ES = 0.85), passes (p = 0.897; ES = 0.02), dribbles (p = 0.823; ES = -0.05), or positional centroid (p = 0.053; ES = 0.56). Larger pitch sizes can be implemented as a meaningful task constraint to increase the internal and external load experienced by soccer players during SSGs, as well as to increase the dispersion of players while acting together. These results were found independent of format and age group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most often-used task constraints in designing small-sided games (SSGs) is the manipulation of pitch size to promote increases or decreases in the relative area per player. Such adjustments cause hanges in the acute responses during SSGs. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of smaller vs. larger pitch sizes on soccer players’ physiological, physical, technical, and tactical responses during SSGs. Comparisons between smaller and larger pitches were not considered based on a specific size, but also between using at least two dimensions in the same comparative study, aiming to understand differences between using smaller and larger (independently of the specific dimensions). The data sources utilized were PubMed, PsycINFO, Scielo, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. The database search initially yielded 249 titles. From those, 41 articles were eligible for the systematic review and meta-analysis. Results revealed that, compared to smaller pitches, SSGs played on larger pitches induced greater values for heart rate (p < 0.001; ES = 0.50), rate of perceived exertion (p < 0.001; ES = 0.70), total distance (p < 0.001; ES = 1.95), high-speed running (p < 0.001; ES = 1.20), stretch index (p < 0.001; ES = 1.02) and surface area (p < 0.001; ES = 1.54). No significant differences were found between pitch size regarding the numbers of accelerations (p = 0.232; ES = 0.45), decelerations (p = 0.111; ES = 0.85), passes (p = 0.897; ES = 0.02), dribbles (p = 0.823; ES = -0.05), or positional centroid (p = 0.053; ES = 0.56). Larger pitch sizes can be implemented as a meaningful task constraint to increase the internal and external load experienced by soccer players during SSGs, as well as to increase the dispersion of players while acting together. These results were found independent of format and age group.

This article includes four separate experiments. In the first experiment male beach handball players (n = 24) were randomly assigned to regular training (n = 12) or plyometric and sprint training (n = 12). In the second experiment, male players were assigned to a handball practice only (n = 12), a plyometric training (n = 12), or an eccentric-overload (e.g., versa-pulley machine) training group (n = 12). In the third experiment, participants were assigned to padel training (n = 12) or specific on-court neuromuscular technical actions (n = 12). In the fourth experiment, females between 50–59 years (n = 25), 60–64 years (n = 25), and 65–70 years (n = 25) completed 10 weeks of bench stepping training involving jumps, and were compared to age-matched controls (n = 45). The COD ability was assessed with the 10-m COD ability test (experiments one and two), the COD ability test with 90º and 180º turns (third experiment), and with the timed-up-and-go test (fourth experiment). In experiment one, greater COD improvement was noted in the experimental group compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In experiment two, both intervention groups similarly improved COD when compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In experiment three, although no significant group-time interactions were observed for COD, the experimental group improved all COD measures pre-post-training (p < 0.05), with a larger effect size for COD with 180° turn to the right compared to the control group (effect size = 0.8 vs. 0.3). In experiment four, the three training groups improved COD ability compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, COD is a sensitive marker of adaptation to different training configurations in these diverse groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plyometric jump training (PJT) can be used for improving balance through bilateral and unilateral jump-landing drills. Since the increased number of articles testing the effects of PJT on dynamic and static balance, it is relevant to summarize the evidence and determine the effects across different original articles. This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effects of PJT programs on dynamic and static balance in soccer players. The data sources utilized were Cochrane, Medline (PubMed), SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. (i) Soccer players of any age or sex without injury, illness, or other clinical conditions; (ii) PJT-based programs restricted to a minimum of three weeks (duration); (iii) passive or active control groups; (iv) pre-post interventions values of dynamic and/or static balance; (v) randomized-controlled trials; and (vi) peer reviewed original full-text studies written in English, Portuguese, and/or Spanish. The database search initially identified 803 titles. From those, eight articles were eligible for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The results showed no significant differences between PJT and active controls in dynamic anterior, postero-medial, or postero-lateral balance for both left and right legs (p > 0.05). Additionally, no significant differences were found between PJT and active controls in terms of static balance (p = 0.495). The current evidence suggests that PJT has no significant advantage over active control groups in terms of dynamic or static balance.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of plyometric jump training (PJT) on body composition parameters among males. Relevant articles were searched in the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, WOS, and SCOPUS, using the key words “ballistic”, “complex”, “explosive”, “force-velocity”, “plyometric”, “stretch-shortening cycle”, “jump”, “training”, and “body composition”. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigating the effects of PJT in healthy male’s body composition (e.g., muscle mass; body fat), irrespective of age. From database searching 21 RCTs were included (separate experimental groups = 28; pooled number of participants = 594). Compared to control, PJT produced significant increases in total leg muscle volume (small ES = 0.55, p = 0.009), thigh muscle volume (small ES = 0.38, p = 0.043), thigh girth (large ES = 1.78, p = 0.011), calf girth (large ES = 1.89, p = 0.022), and muscle pennation angle (small ES = 0.53, p = 0.040). However, we did not find significant difference between PJT and control for muscle cross-sectional area, body fat, and skinfold thickness. Heterogeneity remained low-to-moderate for most analyses, and using the Egger’s test publication bias was not found in any of the analyses (p = 0.300–0.900). No injuries were reported among the included studies. PJT seems to be an effective and safe mode of exercise for increasing leg muscle volume, thigh muscle volume, thigh and calf girth, and muscle pennation angle. Therefore, PJT may be effective to improve muscle size and architecture, with potential implications in several clinical and sport-related contexts.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of plyometric jump training (PJT) on body composition parameters among males. Relevant articles were searched in the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, WOS, and SCOPUS, using the key words "ballistic", "complex", "explosive", "force-velocity", "plyometric", "stretch-shortening cycle", "jump", "training", and "body composition". We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigating the effects of PJT in healthy male's body composition (e.g., muscle mass; body fat), irrespective of age. From database searching 21 RCTs were included (separate experimental groups = 28; pooled number of participants = 594). Compared to control, PJT produced significant increases in total leg muscle volume (small ES = 0.55, p = 0.009), thigh muscle volume (small ES = 0.38, p = 0.043), thigh girth (large ES = 1.78, p = 0.011), calf girth (large ES = 1.89, p = 0.022), and muscle pennation angle (small ES = 0.53, p = 0.040). However, we did not find significant difference between PJT and control for muscle cross-sectional area, body fat, and skinfold thickness. Heterogeneity remained low-to-moderate for most analyses, and using the Egger's test publication bias was not found in any of the analyses ( p = 0.300--0.900). No injuries were reported among the included studies. PJT seems to be an effective and safe mode of exercise for increasing leg muscle volume, thigh muscle volume, thigh and calf girth, and muscle pennation angle. Therefore, PJT may be effective to improve muscle size and architecture, with potential implications in several clinical and sport-related contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]