TY - JOUR
T1 - The effects of velocity loss thresholds during resistance training on lower-limb performance enhancement
T2 - A systematic review with meta-analysis
AU - Chen, Bo Ying
AU - Chen, Wei Han
AU - Liu, Yu
AU - Fiolo, Nicholas J.
AU - Fuchs, Philip X.
AU - Huang, Chen Fu
AU - Shiang, Tzyy Yuang
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/8
Y1 - 2024/8
N2 - This study assessed the effects of squat training with different velocity loss (VL) thresholds on squat strength, heavy-load squat velocity (HLSV), light-load squat velocity (LLSV), countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and sprint time (ST). A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted. Meta-analysis was used to examine effects of trainings with different VL thresholds and used meta-regression to examine the interaction effects (correlation) between training effects and VL in different performance-based outcomes. Our systematic search yielded 1017 articles, 13 of which were included in the present study. Meta-analysis revealed that resistance training with both low (0%–20%) and high (30%–45%) VL thresholds improved squat strength, HLSV, LLSV, and CMJ height, but only low VL improved ST (p < 0.05). Training gains for HLSV, LLSV, CMJ (p = 0.088), and ST with low VL were superior to those with high VL (p < 0.05). Meta-regression revealed that CMJ (p = 0.076) and ST (p = 0.010) demonstrated improvements as VL decreased in the range of 0% to 45%. In conclusion, squat resistance training with low (≤20%) VL provides relatively more effective training stimuli, improving performance in power and speed tasks. Optimal VL ranges may be in the range 10% to 20%, ≤20%, and ≤10% for the HLSV and LLSV, CMJ, and ST, respectively.
AB - This study assessed the effects of squat training with different velocity loss (VL) thresholds on squat strength, heavy-load squat velocity (HLSV), light-load squat velocity (LLSV), countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and sprint time (ST). A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted. Meta-analysis was used to examine effects of trainings with different VL thresholds and used meta-regression to examine the interaction effects (correlation) between training effects and VL in different performance-based outcomes. Our systematic search yielded 1017 articles, 13 of which were included in the present study. Meta-analysis revealed that resistance training with both low (0%–20%) and high (30%–45%) VL thresholds improved squat strength, HLSV, LLSV, and CMJ height, but only low VL improved ST (p < 0.05). Training gains for HLSV, LLSV, CMJ (p = 0.088), and ST with low VL were superior to those with high VL (p < 0.05). Meta-regression revealed that CMJ (p = 0.076) and ST (p = 0.010) demonstrated improvements as VL decreased in the range of 0% to 45%. In conclusion, squat resistance training with low (≤20%) VL provides relatively more effective training stimuli, improving performance in power and speed tasks. Optimal VL ranges may be in the range 10% to 20%, ≤20%, and ≤10% for the HLSV and LLSV, CMJ, and ST, respectively.
KW - Countermovement jump
KW - power
KW - speed
KW - sprint
KW - squat
KW - strength
KW - velocity-based training
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85190852554&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85190852554&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/17479541241244581
DO - 10.1177/17479541241244581
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85190852554
SN - 1747-9541
VL - 19
SP - 1863
EP - 1877
JO - International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching
JF - International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching
IS - 4
ER -