Louise Marvin, Paul Read, Blake McLean, Sam Palmer, Job Fransen
{"title":"提高成年田径团体运动员减速能力的训练干预措施","authors":"Louise Marvin, Paul Read, Blake McLean, Sam Palmer, Job Fransen","doi":"10.47206/ijsc.v4i1.313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Deceleration is a fundamental component of multidirectional speed by which athletes reduce the velocity of their centre of mass to stop or execute changes of direction following acceleration or running at a constant velocity. Enhancing deceleration abilities is crucial for athletes as successfully executing horizontal deceleration has important implications for match outcomes in sports requiring rapid multidirectional movements. However, specific training interventions targeting deceleration are scarce. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of training interventions on deceleration performance in adult team-based field and court sports athletes. \nMethods: A systematic literature search was conducted through electronic databases, SPORTdiscus, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to February 2022, and re-run in May 2023. The search terms were related to different training interventions and kinetic, kinematic, and performance outcomes related to deceleration performance. Studies were included if they consisted of a randomised controlled trial which investigated the effects of training on deceleration-specific outcome measures in adult team-based field and court sports athletes. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2). Post-intervention effect sizes (Hedge’s g) were calculated between the intervention and control groups and a meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. \nResults: Twelve studies were included, with 29 deceleration-specific outcomes measured in a total of 381 participants. There was inconsistency in methodological designs, including control group types, length and type of interventions and in reported deceleration-specific outcome measures. Across all observations of deceleration performance measures there was a standardised mean difference of -0.04 (95% CI: -0.50, 0.42), favouring control groups, indicating little effect of training on deceleration performance. For secondary outcomes related to deceleration, for kinetics (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI = -0.83, 0.25, I2 = 55%, p < 0.01), joint kinetics (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI = -1.01, 0.61, I2 = 68%, p < 0.01) and muscle activation (SMD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.44, 0.24, I2 = 19%, p = 0.28) had greater effects for control groups, whereas joint kinematics (SMD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.11, 0.24, I2 = 0%, p = 0.77), favoured the intervention groups. \nConclusion: For the deceleration-specific outcomes reported in the included studies, training was not likely to produce a performance improvement in participants compared to control groups. However, due to methodological inconsistencies between studies and observed high risk of bias, the results should be interpreted with caution. More rigorous research methods should be included in the future to address areas that may introduce potential biases. Future research should address the differences in the type, timing, frequency, and duration of the implemented training interventions for improving deceleration performance, and in the reported deceleration-specific outcome measures. \nRegistration: This systematic review was registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/cmwbr) (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CMWBR)","PeriodicalId":170948,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Strength and Conditioning","volume":"98 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Training Interventions for Improved Deceleration Ability in Adult Team-Based Field Sports Athletes\",\"authors\":\"Louise Marvin, Paul Read, Blake McLean, Sam Palmer, Job Fransen\",\"doi\":\"10.47206/ijsc.v4i1.313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Deceleration is a fundamental component of multidirectional speed by which athletes reduce the velocity of their centre of mass to stop or execute changes of direction following acceleration or running at a constant velocity. Enhancing deceleration abilities is crucial for athletes as successfully executing horizontal deceleration has important implications for match outcomes in sports requiring rapid multidirectional movements. However, specific training interventions targeting deceleration are scarce. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of training interventions on deceleration performance in adult team-based field and court sports athletes. \\nMethods: A systematic literature search was conducted through electronic databases, SPORTdiscus, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to February 2022, and re-run in May 2023. The search terms were related to different training interventions and kinetic, kinematic, and performance outcomes related to deceleration performance. Studies were included if they consisted of a randomised controlled trial which investigated the effects of training on deceleration-specific outcome measures in adult team-based field and court sports athletes. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2). Post-intervention effect sizes (Hedge’s g) were calculated between the intervention and control groups and a meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. \\nResults: Twelve studies were included, with 29 deceleration-specific outcomes measured in a total of 381 participants. There was inconsistency in methodological designs, including control group types, length and type of interventions and in reported deceleration-specific outcome measures. Across all observations of deceleration performance measures there was a standardised mean difference of -0.04 (95% CI: -0.50, 0.42), favouring control groups, indicating little effect of training on deceleration performance. For secondary outcomes related to deceleration, for kinetics (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI = -0.83, 0.25, I2 = 55%, p < 0.01), joint kinetics (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI = -1.01, 0.61, I2 = 68%, p < 0.01) and muscle activation (SMD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.44, 0.24, I2 = 19%, p = 0.28) had greater effects for control groups, whereas joint kinematics (SMD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.11, 0.24, I2 = 0%, p = 0.77), favoured the intervention groups. \\nConclusion: For the deceleration-specific outcomes reported in the included studies, training was not likely to produce a performance improvement in participants compared to control groups. However, due to methodological inconsistencies between studies and observed high risk of bias, the results should be interpreted with caution. More rigorous research methods should be included in the future to address areas that may introduce potential biases. Future research should address the differences in the type, timing, frequency, and duration of the implemented training interventions for improving deceleration performance, and in the reported deceleration-specific outcome measures. \\nRegistration: This systematic review was registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/cmwbr) (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CMWBR)\",\"PeriodicalId\":170948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Strength and Conditioning\",\"volume\":\"98 21\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Strength and Conditioning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47206/ijsc.v4i1.313\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Strength and Conditioning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47206/ijsc.v4i1.313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:减速是多向速度的一个基本组成部分,运动员在加速或匀速奔跑后,通过减速降低质心速度来停止或改变方向。提高减速能力对运动员至关重要,因为在需要快速多向运动的体育项目中,成功执行水平减速对比赛结果有重要影响。然而,针对减速的具体训练干预措施却很少。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是研究训练干预措施对成年团体野外和球场运动运动员减速表现的影响。方法:通过电子数据库 SPORTdiscus、PubMed 和 Web of Science 进行了系统性文献检索,检索期从开始到 2022 年 2 月,并于 2023 年 5 月重新运行。检索词涉及不同的训练干预措施以及与减速性能相关的动力学、运动学和性能结果。如果研究包含随机对照试验,调查了训练对以团队为基础的成年田径和球场运动运动员的减速特异性结果测量的影响,则纳入该研究。偏倚风险采用修订版 Cochrane 随机试验偏倚风险工具 (RoB2) 进行评估。计算了干预组和对照组之间的干预后效应大小(Hedge's g),并使用随机效应模型进行了荟萃分析。分析结果共纳入了 12 项研究,对 381 名参与者的 29 项减速特定结果进行了测量。研究方法设计不一致,包括对照组类型、干预时间和类型,以及报告的减速特定结果测量。在减速性能测量的所有观察结果中,标准化平均差异为-0.04(95% CI:-0.50,0.42),对照组更胜一筹,这表明训练对减速性能的影响很小。在与减速有关的次要结果中,动力学(SMD = -0.29,95% CI = -0.83,0.25,I2 = 55%,P <0.01)、关节动力学(SMD = -0.20,95% CI = -1.01,0.61,I2 = 68%,P <0.01)和肌肉激活(SMD = -0.01,95% CI = -0.83,0.25,I2 = 55%,P <0.01)的标准化平均差为-0.04(95% CI:-0.50,0.42)。10, 95% CI = -0.44, 0.24, I2 = 19%, p = 0.28)对对照组的影响更大,而关节运动学(SMD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.11, 0.24, I2 = 0%, p = 0.77)则有利于干预组。结论就纳入研究报告的减速特异性结果而言,与对照组相比,训练不太可能提高参与者的成绩。然而,由于各研究之间的方法不一致,且观察到的偏倚风险较高,因此在解释结果时应谨慎。今后应采用更严格的研究方法,以解决可能带来潜在偏差的领域。未来的研究应解决为提高减速性能而实施的训练干预在类型、时间、频率和持续时间上的差异,以及所报告的减速特定结果测量的差异。注册:本系统综述已在开放科学框架 (https://osf.io/cmwbr) 上注册 (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CMWBR)
Training Interventions for Improved Deceleration Ability in Adult Team-Based Field Sports Athletes
Background: Deceleration is a fundamental component of multidirectional speed by which athletes reduce the velocity of their centre of mass to stop or execute changes of direction following acceleration or running at a constant velocity. Enhancing deceleration abilities is crucial for athletes as successfully executing horizontal deceleration has important implications for match outcomes in sports requiring rapid multidirectional movements. However, specific training interventions targeting deceleration are scarce. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of training interventions on deceleration performance in adult team-based field and court sports athletes.
Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted through electronic databases, SPORTdiscus, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to February 2022, and re-run in May 2023. The search terms were related to different training interventions and kinetic, kinematic, and performance outcomes related to deceleration performance. Studies were included if they consisted of a randomised controlled trial which investigated the effects of training on deceleration-specific outcome measures in adult team-based field and court sports athletes. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2). Post-intervention effect sizes (Hedge’s g) were calculated between the intervention and control groups and a meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model.
Results: Twelve studies were included, with 29 deceleration-specific outcomes measured in a total of 381 participants. There was inconsistency in methodological designs, including control group types, length and type of interventions and in reported deceleration-specific outcome measures. Across all observations of deceleration performance measures there was a standardised mean difference of -0.04 (95% CI: -0.50, 0.42), favouring control groups, indicating little effect of training on deceleration performance. For secondary outcomes related to deceleration, for kinetics (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI = -0.83, 0.25, I2 = 55%, p < 0.01), joint kinetics (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI = -1.01, 0.61, I2 = 68%, p < 0.01) and muscle activation (SMD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.44, 0.24, I2 = 19%, p = 0.28) had greater effects for control groups, whereas joint kinematics (SMD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.11, 0.24, I2 = 0%, p = 0.77), favoured the intervention groups.
Conclusion: For the deceleration-specific outcomes reported in the included studies, training was not likely to produce a performance improvement in participants compared to control groups. However, due to methodological inconsistencies between studies and observed high risk of bias, the results should be interpreted with caution. More rigorous research methods should be included in the future to address areas that may introduce potential biases. Future research should address the differences in the type, timing, frequency, and duration of the implemented training interventions for improving deceleration performance, and in the reported deceleration-specific outcome measures.
Registration: This systematic review was registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/cmwbr) (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CMWBR)