Effects of Combined Strength Training Methods on Athletes and Healthy Participants on Sprint and Strength Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta‑analysis of Controlled Studies

1Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to examine the effects of combined strength training methods on sprint and Strength performance, compared to controls groups (CG).The meta-analysis included peer-reviewed articles that incorporated Combined Training (CT) groups in healthy participants and athletes, a CG, and a measure of sprint (5m, 10m, 20m and 30m) and strength (1RM squat). Using the random-effects model, effect sizes (ES; Hedge’s g) were calculated for sprint and strength measures using means and SDs from pre- and post-tests for each dependent variable. Thirty-one studies were included, comprising 1,271 participants.CT improved sprint tests, 10m (ES = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.97; p < 0.001), 20m (ES = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.21 to 0.70; p < 0.001), 30m (ES = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.71; p < 0.001) and strength test, 1RM squat (ES = 1.53; 95% CI = 0.98 to 2.07; p < 0.001). Results based in a specific combination found a significant statistically effect type (p = 0.010; ES = 1.03) after PL combined with speed training compared to PL combined with strength in 30m sprint and a significant moderator effect was noted (p = 0.013; ES = 2.02) after PL combined with strength compared to PL combined with two or more training methods in 1RM squat.Combined strength training methods is an effective way to improve sprint and strength performance on healthy participants and athletes in comparison to control conditions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

León Muñoz, C., Ramírez Campillo, R., Traver Gil, P., & de Villarreal Sáez, E. S. (2024). Effects of Combined Strength Training Methods on Athletes and Healthy Participants on Sprint and Strength Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta‑analysis of Controlled Studies. Retos, 55, 999–1009. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v56.104343

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free