The Effects of Repeated-Sprint Training on Physical Fitness and Physiological Adaptation in Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background Repeated-sprint training (RST) is a common training method for enhancing physical fitness in athletes. To advance RST prescription, it is important to understand the effects of programming variables on physical fitness and physiological adaptation. Objectives This study (1) quantifies the...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sports medicine (Auckland) 2024-04, Vol.54 (4), p.953-974 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Repeated-sprint training (RST) is a common training method for enhancing physical fitness in athletes. To advance RST prescription, it is important to understand the effects of programming variables on physical fitness and physiological adaptation.
Objectives
This study (1) quantifies the pooled effects of running RST on changes in 10 and 20 m sprint time, maximal oxygen consumption (
V
O
2max
), Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1 (YYIR1) distance, repeated-sprint ability (RSA), countermovement jump (CMJ) height and change of direction (COD) ability in athletes, and (2) examines the moderating effects of program duration, training frequency, weekly volume, sprint modality, repetition distance, number of repetitions per set and number of sets per session on changes in these outcome measures.
Methods
Pubmed, SPORTDiscus and Scopus databases were searched for original research articles up to 04 July 2023, investigating RST in healthy, able-bodied athletes, between 14 and 35 years of age, and a performance calibre of trained or above. RST interventions were limited to repeated, maximal running (land-based) sprints of ≤ 10 s duration, with ≤ 60 s recovery, performed for 2–12 weeks. A Downs and Black checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Eligible data were analysed using multi-level mixed-effects meta-analysis, with standardised mean changes determined for all outcomes. Standardised effects [Hedges
G
(
G
)] were evaluated based on coverage of their confidence (compatibility) intervals (CI) using a strength and conditioning specific reference value of
G
= 0.25 to declare an improvement (i.e.
G
> 0.25) or impairment (i.e.
G
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0112-1642 1179-2035 1179-2035 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s40279-023-01959-1 |