目的:借助网状荟萃分析系统评估不同热身方法对下肢爆发力急性效应的影响,并追踪最佳方法。
方法:R软件结合Stata软件,版本13.0,用于分析35篇纳入论文的结果指标。使用随机效应模型汇集平均差异(MD)。
结果:1)静态结合动态牵伸[MD=1.80,95%CI:(0.43,3.20)]和动态牵伸[MD=1.60,95%CI:(0.67,2.60)]在提高反动跳高(cm)方面明显优于对照组,动态拉伸的效果受拉伸时间的影响(I2=80.4%),研究人群(I2=77.2%)和年龄(I2=75.6%)作为调节变量,以7-10min的动态拉伸时间效果最为显著。2)仅动态拉伸[MD=-0.08,95%CI:(-0.15,-0.008)]在改善冲刺时间(s)方面显着优于对照组,而静态拉伸[MD=0.07,95%CI:(0.002,0.13)]显示出显著的,负面影响。3)没有结果可以证明其他方法之间存在显著差异,如泡沫轴滚动,和对照组。
结论:本综述的结果表明,静态拉伸降低了爆炸性能,而2个热身方法,即动态拉伸和静态结合动态拉伸,能够显著提高爆炸性能,动态拉伸最稳定,多变量调节,动态拉伸7-10min产生最佳的爆炸性能。在未来,应在严格遵守测试规范的基础上增加高质量的研究。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of different warm-up methods on the acute effect of lower limb explosive strength with the help of a reticulated meta-analysis system and to track the optimal method.
METHODS: R software combined with Stata software, version 13.0, was used to analyse the outcome metrics of the 35 included papers. Mean differences (MD) were pooled using a random effects model.
RESULTS: 1) Static combined with dynamic stretching [MD = 1.80, 95% CI: (0.43, 3.20)] and dynamic stretching [MD = 1.60, 95% CI: (0.67, 2.60)] were significantly better than controls in terms of improving countermovement jump height (cm), and the effect of dynamic stretching was influenced by the duration of stretching (I2 = 80.4%), study population (I2 = 77.2%) and age (I2 = 75.6%) as moderating variables, with the most significant effect size for dynamic stretching time of 7-10min. 2) Only dynamic stretching [MD = -0.08, 95% CI: (-0.15, -0.008)] was significantly better than the control group in terms of improving sprint time (s), while static stretching [MD = 0.07, 95% CI: (0.002, 0.13)] showed a significant, negative effect. 3) No results were available to demonstrate a significant difference between other methods, such as foam axis rolling, and the control group.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate that static stretching reduced explosive performance, while the 2 warm-up methods, namely dynamic stretching and static combined with dynamic stretching, were able to significantly improve explosive performance, with dynamic stretching being the most stable and moderated by multiple variables and dynamic stretching for 7-10min producing the best explosive performance. In the future, high-quality studies should be added based on strict adherence to test specifications.