Effects of Different Training Methods on Open-Skill and Closed-Skill Agility in Basketball Players: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Mingxiang Zhang, Feng Li, Jiao Jiao, Wei Liang, Miguel-Angel Gomez, Aaron T Scanlan
{"title":"Effects of Different Training Methods on Open-Skill and Closed-Skill Agility in Basketball Players: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mingxiang Zhang, Feng Li, Jiao Jiao, Wei Liang, Miguel-Angel Gomez, Aaron T Scanlan","doi":"10.1186/s40798-025-00842-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Open-skill and closed-skill agility attributes are pivotal for achieving success in basketball. However, systematic synthesis of evidence regarding the effectiveness of different basketball-specific training methods on agility performance is lacking among basketball players in the literature. Consequently, this systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of prominent training methods in improving open-skill and closed-skill agility in basketball players.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using keywords related to 'basketball', 'agility', and 'training', we searched for experimental studies in PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost databases that were published in the last decade (between January 2013 and September 2023). The included training methods were categorized into five groups, including reaction training (RT), speed training (SpT), strength and balance training (SBT), plyometric training (PT), and stretching training (StrT). The effects of training methods were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals in R software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 42 separate effects. Studies only assessed the effects of different training methods on closed-skill agility performance, with no open-skill agility assessments used. Improvements in closed-skill agility were apparent between pre-and post-training intervention with most training methods including a large effect for RT [SMD = 0.86, 95% CI (0.53, 1.19)], medium effects for PT [SMD = 0.62, 95%CI (0.38, 0.86)] and SBT [SMD = 0.59, 95%CI (0.13, 1.05)], and a small effect for SpT [SMD = 0.43, 95%CI (0.13, 0.74)]. While no effect for StrT [SMD = 0, 95%CI (-0.98, 0.98)] was apparent, only one study examined this training method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RT appears to be the most effective method for developing closed-skill agility among basketball players, particularly when implemented in small-sided games. SBT and PT also appear impactful in developing closed-skill agility to similar extents. SpT appears to benefit closed-skill agility to a minor extent with limited research examining the effectiveness of StrT on agility among basketball players. Surprisingly, no studies have incorporated open-skill agility tests when assessing the effectiveness of training methods, which is essential to address in future research. Outcomes from this review provide guidance to basketball coaches and performance staff for selecting training methods that optimize closed-skill agility performance in their players.</p>","PeriodicalId":21788,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine - Open","volume":"11 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12058619/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine - Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-025-00842-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Open-skill and closed-skill agility attributes are pivotal for achieving success in basketball. However, systematic synthesis of evidence regarding the effectiveness of different basketball-specific training methods on agility performance is lacking among basketball players in the literature. Consequently, this systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of prominent training methods in improving open-skill and closed-skill agility in basketball players.

Methods: Using keywords related to 'basketball', 'agility', and 'training', we searched for experimental studies in PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost databases that were published in the last decade (between January 2013 and September 2023). The included training methods were categorized into five groups, including reaction training (RT), speed training (SpT), strength and balance training (SBT), plyometric training (PT), and stretching training (StrT). The effects of training methods were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals in R software.

Results: A total of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 42 separate effects. Studies only assessed the effects of different training methods on closed-skill agility performance, with no open-skill agility assessments used. Improvements in closed-skill agility were apparent between pre-and post-training intervention with most training methods including a large effect for RT [SMD = 0.86, 95% CI (0.53, 1.19)], medium effects for PT [SMD = 0.62, 95%CI (0.38, 0.86)] and SBT [SMD = 0.59, 95%CI (0.13, 1.05)], and a small effect for SpT [SMD = 0.43, 95%CI (0.13, 0.74)]. While no effect for StrT [SMD = 0, 95%CI (-0.98, 0.98)] was apparent, only one study examined this training method.

Conclusions: RT appears to be the most effective method for developing closed-skill agility among basketball players, particularly when implemented in small-sided games. SBT and PT also appear impactful in developing closed-skill agility to similar extents. SpT appears to benefit closed-skill agility to a minor extent with limited research examining the effectiveness of StrT on agility among basketball players. Surprisingly, no studies have incorporated open-skill agility tests when assessing the effectiveness of training methods, which is essential to address in future research. Outcomes from this review provide guidance to basketball coaches and performance staff for selecting training methods that optimize closed-skill agility performance in their players.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

不同训练方式对篮球运动员开放式和封闭式敏捷性的影响:系统回顾和meta分析。
背景:在篮球运动中,开放式技术和封闭式技术的敏捷性是取得成功的关键。然而,文献中缺乏关于不同篮球专项训练方法对篮球运动员敏捷性表现的有效性的系统综合证据。因此,本研究采用meta分析的方法,旨在评价突出的训练方法在提高篮球运动员开放技术和封闭技术敏捷性方面的有效性。方法:使用与“篮球”、“敏捷”和“训练”相关的关键词,我们在PubMed、Web of Science和EBSCOhost数据库中检索了近十年(2013年1月至2023年9月)发表的实验研究。纳入的训练方法分为五组,包括反应训练(RT),速度训练(SpT),力量和平衡训练(SBT),增强训练(PT)和拉伸训练(StrT)。在R软件中使用95%置信区间的标准化平均差异(SMD)来总结训练方法的效果。结果:共有29项研究符合纳入标准,包括42个独立的效应。研究只评估了不同训练方法对封闭式技能敏捷性表现的影响,没有使用开放式技能敏捷性评估。在训练前后,封闭式技能敏捷性的改善是明显的,大多数训练方法包括:RT有较大效果[SMD = 0.86, 95%CI (0.53, 1.19)], PT有中等效果[SMD = 0.62, 95%CI(0.38, 0.86)]和SBT [SMD = 0.59, 95%CI (0.13, 1.05)], SpT有较小效果[SMD = 0.43, 95%CI(0.13, 0.74)]。虽然StrT没有明显的效果[SMD = 0, 95%CI(-0.98, 0.98)],但只有一项研究检验了这种训练方法。结论:RT似乎是发展篮球运动员封闭式技术敏捷性的最有效方法,特别是在小型比赛中实施时。SBT和PT在开发封闭式技能敏捷性方面也有类似的影响。SpT似乎在很小程度上有利于封闭技术敏捷性,有限的研究检查了StrT对篮球运动员敏捷性的有效性。令人惊讶的是,在评估训练方法的有效性时,没有研究纳入开放式技能敏捷性测试,这对未来的研究至关重要。本综述的结果为篮球教练和训练人员选择训练方法提供了指导,以优化球员的封闭式技能敏捷性表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports Medicine - Open
Sports Medicine - Open SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
142
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信