Frontiers in physiology · 2026
Comparative effects of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on physical fitness in adolescent team-sport athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Fengming, Liu Yang, Shi Shijie, Wang Hanpeng, Liu Jiale, Yeremenko Oleksandr
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the relative effects of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on jump, sprint, and change-of-direction performance in adolescent team-sport athletes.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases. Effect sizes were calculated from pre- and post-training changes and pooled using a random-effects model, expressed as SMD (Hedges' g) and its 95% CI.
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies involving 388 participants were included. Between-group comparisons showed no significant differences for countermovement jump (CMJ) (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.649), standing long jump (SLJ) (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.15, I² = 0%, p = 0.268), ≤10 m sprint (SMD = -0.22, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.09, I² = 0%, p = 0.164), ≥20 m sprint (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.669), or change-of-direction (COD) (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.31, I² = 27.9%, p = 0.946). Unilateral plyometric training showed greater improvements in single-leg tasks, including single-leg CMJ (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.61, I² = 0%, p = 0.013) and single-leg COD (SMD = -0.61, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.21, I² = 0%, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: This study found no clear between-group advantage between unilateral and bilateral plyometric training for bilateral jump performance (CMJ and SLJ), sprint performance (≤10 m and ≥20 m), or COD. However, unilateral plyometric training appeared to provide greater benefits in single-leg tasks, particularly single-leg CMJ and single-leg COD, suggesting a possible task-specific advantage.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier PROSPERO CRD420261324213.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases. Effect sizes were calculated from pre- and post-training changes and pooled using a random-effects model, expressed as SMD (Hedges' g) and its 95% CI.
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies involving 388 participants were included. Between-group comparisons showed no significant differences for countermovement jump (CMJ) (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.649), standing long jump (SLJ) (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.15, I² = 0%, p = 0.268), ≤10 m sprint (SMD = -0.22, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.09, I² = 0%, p = 0.164), ≥20 m sprint (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.669), or change-of-direction (COD) (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.31, I² = 27.9%, p = 0.946). Unilateral plyometric training showed greater improvements in single-leg tasks, including single-leg CMJ (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.61, I² = 0%, p = 0.013) and single-leg COD (SMD = -0.61, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.21, I² = 0%, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: This study found no clear between-group advantage between unilateral and bilateral plyometric training for bilateral jump performance (CMJ and SLJ), sprint performance (≤10 m and ≥20 m), or COD. However, unilateral plyometric training appeared to provide greater benefits in single-leg tasks, particularly single-leg CMJ and single-leg COD, suggesting a possible task-specific advantage.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier PROSPERO CRD420261324213.