Cargando…

CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: CrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest growing high-intensity functional training modes in the world. However, scientific data regarding the practice of CrossFit is sparse. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze the findings of scientific literature related to CrossFi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Claudino, João Gustavo, Gabbett, Tim J., Bourgeois, Frank, Souza, Helton de Sá, Miranda, Rafael Chagas, Mezêncio, Bruno, Soncin, Rafael, Cardoso Filho, Carlos Alberto, Bottaro, Martim, Hernandez, Arnaldo Jose, Amadio, Alberto Carlos, Serrão, Julio Cerca
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5826907/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29484512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-018-0124-5
_version_ 1783302393873563648
author Claudino, João Gustavo
Gabbett, Tim J.
Bourgeois, Frank
Souza, Helton de Sá
Miranda, Rafael Chagas
Mezêncio, Bruno
Soncin, Rafael
Cardoso Filho, Carlos Alberto
Bottaro, Martim
Hernandez, Arnaldo Jose
Amadio, Alberto Carlos
Serrão, Julio Cerca
author_facet Claudino, João Gustavo
Gabbett, Tim J.
Bourgeois, Frank
Souza, Helton de Sá
Miranda, Rafael Chagas
Mezêncio, Bruno
Soncin, Rafael
Cardoso Filho, Carlos Alberto
Bottaro, Martim
Hernandez, Arnaldo Jose
Amadio, Alberto Carlos
Serrão, Julio Cerca
author_sort Claudino, João Gustavo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: CrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest growing high-intensity functional training modes in the world. However, scientific data regarding the practice of CrossFit is sparse. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze the findings of scientific literature related to CrossFit via systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Systematic searches of the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Bireme/MedLine, and SciELO online databases were conducted for articles reporting the effects of CrossFit training. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The Oxford Levels of Evidence was used for all included articles, and only studies that investigated the effects of CrossFit as a training program were included in the meta-analysis. For the meta-analysis, effect sizes (ESs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles were included in the systematic review and four were included in the meta-analysis. However, only two studies had a high level of evidence at low risk of bias. Scientific literature related to CrossFit has reported on body composition, psycho-physiological parameters, musculoskeletal injury risk, life and health aspects, and psycho-social behavior. In the meta-analysis, significant results were not found for any variables. CONCLUSIONS: The current scientific literature related to CrossFit has few studies with high level of evidence at low risk of bias. However, preliminary data has suggested that CrossFit practice is associated with higher levels of sense of community, satisfaction, and motivation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40798-018-0124-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5826907
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58269072018-03-01 CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Claudino, João Gustavo Gabbett, Tim J. Bourgeois, Frank Souza, Helton de Sá Miranda, Rafael Chagas Mezêncio, Bruno Soncin, Rafael Cardoso Filho, Carlos Alberto Bottaro, Martim Hernandez, Arnaldo Jose Amadio, Alberto Carlos Serrão, Julio Cerca Sports Med Open Systematic Review BACKGROUND: CrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest growing high-intensity functional training modes in the world. However, scientific data regarding the practice of CrossFit is sparse. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze the findings of scientific literature related to CrossFit via systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Systematic searches of the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Bireme/MedLine, and SciELO online databases were conducted for articles reporting the effects of CrossFit training. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The Oxford Levels of Evidence was used for all included articles, and only studies that investigated the effects of CrossFit as a training program were included in the meta-analysis. For the meta-analysis, effect sizes (ESs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles were included in the systematic review and four were included in the meta-analysis. However, only two studies had a high level of evidence at low risk of bias. Scientific literature related to CrossFit has reported on body composition, psycho-physiological parameters, musculoskeletal injury risk, life and health aspects, and psycho-social behavior. In the meta-analysis, significant results were not found for any variables. CONCLUSIONS: The current scientific literature related to CrossFit has few studies with high level of evidence at low risk of bias. However, preliminary data has suggested that CrossFit practice is associated with higher levels of sense of community, satisfaction, and motivation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40798-018-0124-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2018-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5826907/ /pubmed/29484512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-018-0124-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Claudino, João Gustavo
Gabbett, Tim J.
Bourgeois, Frank
Souza, Helton de Sá
Miranda, Rafael Chagas
Mezêncio, Bruno
Soncin, Rafael
Cardoso Filho, Carlos Alberto
Bottaro, Martim
Hernandez, Arnaldo Jose
Amadio, Alberto Carlos
Serrão, Julio Cerca
CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_fullStr CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_short CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_sort crossfit overview: systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5826907/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29484512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-018-0124-5
work_keys_str_mv AT claudinojoaogustavo crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gabbetttimj crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bourgeoisfrank crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT souzaheltondesa crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mirandarafaelchagas crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mezenciobruno crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT soncinrafael crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cardosofilhocarlosalberto crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bottaromartim crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hernandezarnaldojose crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT amadioalbertocarlos crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT serraojuliocerca crossfitoverviewsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis