Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Mar 8;14(3):e0213158.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213158. eCollection 2019.

Effects of 8-week core training on core endurance and running economy

Affiliations

Effects of 8-week core training on core endurance and running economy

Kwong-Chung Hung et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 8-week core training on core endurance and running economy in college athletes. Twenty-one male college athletes were randomly divided into 2 groups: a control group (CON) (n = 10) and a core training group (CT) (n = 11). Both groups maintained their regular training, whereas CT attended 3 extra core training sessions per week for 8 weeks. The participants were assessed before and after the training program using sensory organization test (SOT), sport-specific endurance plank test (SEPT) and 4-stage treadmill incremental running test (TIRT). Compared with the pre-test, significant improvements were observed in post-test SOT (78.8 ± 4.8 vs. 85.3 ± 4.8, p = 0.012) and SEPT (193.5 ± 71.9 s vs. 241.5 ± 98.9 s, p = 0.001) performances only in CT. In the TIRT, the post-test heart rate values were lower than the pre-test values in CT in the first 3 stages. In stage 4, the post-test oxygen consumption (VO2) was lower than that in pre-test in CT (VO2: 52.4 ± 3.5 vs. 50.0 ± 2.9 ml/kg/min, p = 0.019). These results reveal that 8-week core training may improve static balance, core endurance, and running economy in college athletes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow chart of experiment.
Fig 2
Fig 2. The change of SOT scores in two groups.
SOT: Sensory Organization Test; CON: control group, n = 10; CT: core training group, n = 11. * p<0.05 pre-test vs. post-test.
Fig 3
Fig 3. The change of SEPT scores in two groups.
SEPT: Sport-specific Endurance Plank Test; CON: control group, n = 10; CT: core training group, n = 11. * p<0.05 pre-test vs. post-test.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kibler WB, Press J, Sciascia A. The role of core stability in athletic function. Sports Medicine. 2006;36(3):189–98. 10.2165/00007256-200636030-00001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chung S, Lee J, Yoon J. Effects of stabilization exercise using a ball on mutifidus cross-sectional area in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine. 2013;12(3):533–41. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kline JB, Krauss JR, Maher SF, Qu X. Core strength training using a combination of home exercises and a dynamic sling system for the management of low back pain in pre-professional ballet dancers: A case series. Journal of Dance Medicine & Science. 2013;17(1):24–33. - PubMed
    1. Macedo LG, Maher CG, Latimer J, McAuley JH. Motor control exercise for persistent, nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review. Physical Therapy. 2009;89(1):9–25. 10.2522/ptj.20080103 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Faries MD, Greenwood M. Core training: Stabilizing the confusion. Strength & Conditioning Journal. 2007;29(2):10–25.

Publication types