Cargando…
Heavy Resistance Training Versus Plyometric Training for Improving Running Economy and Running Time Trial Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: As an adjunct to running training, heavy resistance and plyometric training have recently drawn attention as potential training modalities that improve running economy and running time trial performance. However, the comparative effectiveness is unknown. The present systematic review and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9653533/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36370207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-022-00511-1 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: As an adjunct to running training, heavy resistance and plyometric training have recently drawn attention as potential training modalities that improve running economy and running time trial performance. However, the comparative effectiveness is unknown. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine if there are different effects of heavy resistance training versus plyometric training as an adjunct to running training on running economy and running time trial performance in long-distance runners. METHODS: Electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus were searched. Twenty-two studies completely satisfied the selection criteria. Data on running economy and running time trial performance were extracted for the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed with selected potential moderators. RESULTS: The pooled effect size for running economy in heavy resistance training was greater (g = − 0.32 [95% confidence intervals [CIs] − 0.55 to − 0.10]: effect size = small) than that in plyometric training (g = -0.13 [95% CIs − 0.47 to 0.21]: trivial). The effect on running time trial performance was also larger in heavy resistance training (g = − 0.24 [95% CIs − 1.04 to − 0.55]: small) than that in plyometric training (g = − 0.17 [95% CIs − 0.27 to − 0.06]: trivial). Heavy resistance training with nearly maximal loads (≥ 90% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM], g = − 0.31 [95% CIs − 0.61 to − 0.02]: small) provided greater effects than those with lower loads (< 90% 1RM, g = − 0.17 [95% CIs − 1.05 to 0.70]: trivial). Greater effects were evident when training was performed for a longer period in both heavy resistance (10–14 weeks, g = − 0.45 [95% CIs − 0.83 to − 0.08]: small vs. 6–8 weeks, g = − 0.21 [95% CIs − 0.56 to 0.15]: small) and plyometric training (8–10 weeks, g = 0.26 [95% CIs − 0.67 to 0.15]: small vs. 4–6 weeks, g = − 0.06 [95% CIs 0.67 to 0.55]: trivial). CONCLUSIONS: Heavy resistance training, especially with nearly maximal loads, may be superior to plyometric training in improving running economy and running time trial performance. In addition, running economy appears to be improved better when training is performed for a longer period in both heavy resistance and plyometric training. |
---|