The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness · 2025
Comparison of the effect of the TRX Suspension Trainer and the Physioball devices on developing trunk muscles: a quasi-experimental study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Varga Dorottya, Alfatafta Huda, Atallah Huthaifa, Csernák Gabriella, Derkács Evelin, Makai Alexandra, Gyuró Mónika S, Boncz Imre, Molics Bálint
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of our research was to compare the effects of the TRX Suspension Trainer and Physioball devices on developing trunk muscles among primary school students.
METHODS: In this quasi-experimental study, we used non-randomized sampling methods. 40 primary school students were involved in the study (14 years old). The participants exclusively used TRX and Physioball devices between the warm-up and relaxation part. For the measurement we applied the trunk stability test (modified plank test) and the dynamic balance test (Y-balance test, star balance test). Statistical tests used: Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney U Test. The P value was set at P<0.050. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 26.0 software.
RESULTS: The local muscular endurance of the core muscles was significantly improved in both groups (P<0.001). In the TRX and in the Physioball group the stability of the upper limb was significantly improved (P<0.050), except for one direction (P=0.059) in the TRX group. In the lower limb of the TRX and of the Physioball group there was a significant improvement (P<0.050) except for two directions (medial: P=0.083; anteromedial: P=0.154) in the TRX group and two directions (anterior: P=0.052; posteromedial: P=0.085) in the Physioball group.
CONCLUSIONS: The applied program had a positive effect, but no significant difference was found between the developmental effects of the TRX and Physioball. Despite the different availability prices of the devices and the similar but different mechanisms of action of the devices, it can be said that both devices are equally effective.
METHODS: In this quasi-experimental study, we used non-randomized sampling methods. 40 primary school students were involved in the study (14 years old). The participants exclusively used TRX and Physioball devices between the warm-up and relaxation part. For the measurement we applied the trunk stability test (modified plank test) and the dynamic balance test (Y-balance test, star balance test). Statistical tests used: Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney U Test. The P value was set at P<0.050. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 26.0 software.
RESULTS: The local muscular endurance of the core muscles was significantly improved in both groups (P<0.001). In the TRX and in the Physioball group the stability of the upper limb was significantly improved (P<0.050), except for one direction (P=0.059) in the TRX group. In the lower limb of the TRX and of the Physioball group there was a significant improvement (P<0.050) except for two directions (medial: P=0.083; anteromedial: P=0.154) in the TRX group and two directions (anterior: P=0.052; posteromedial: P=0.085) in the Physioball group.
CONCLUSIONS: The applied program had a positive effect, but no significant difference was found between the developmental effects of the TRX and Physioball. Despite the different availability prices of the devices and the similar but different mechanisms of action of the devices, it can be said that both devices are equally effective.