3.8 Article

A combined plyometric and resistance training program improves fitness performance in 12 to 14-years-old boys

Journal

SPORT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 615-621

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s11332-019-00560-2

Keywords

Adolescent; Strength training; Stretch-shortening cycle; Power

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Nowadays resistance and plyometric training are deemed to be a crucial component of a health promoting lifestyle in youth. Effects of resistance training and plyometric training may actually be synergistic, with their combined effects being greater than each program performed alone. Aims This randomized controlled study aimed to compare the effects of an 8-week training period of combined plyometric and resistance training with resistance training alone on fitness performance in boys. Methods Participants (24 boys, 12-14 years) were randomly assigned to an 8-week combined training group (CT, n=12) that performed plyometric exercises (similar to 20 min.) followed by resistance training or a resistance training group (RT, n=12) that performed static stretching exercises (similar to 20 min.) followed by the same resistance training program. Both groups performed twice weekly training sessions of 90 min. At baseline and after training all participants were tested on the 20-m sprint (time) and Squat Jump (power, velocity, force and height). Results The CT group showed significantly (p<0.05) improvement than RT in the 20-m sprint time (-0.07 vs. 0.05 s), and Squat Jump (Power: 159.0 vs. -5.0 W; velocity: 0.2 vs. -0.2 m s(-1); force: 41.2 vs. -57.4 N; height: 10.6 vs. -0.3 cm) following training. Conclusions Results suggest that when seeking to induce specific acute adaptations in vertical jump and acceleration capacities in lower limbs, male adolescents may benefit more from exposure to a combination of plyometric and resistance training methods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available