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
Meta-Analysis
. 2020 May 1;19(2):347-357.
eCollection 2020 Jun.

The Effects of Assisted and Resisted Plyometric Training Programs on Vertical Jump Performance in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hubert Makaruk  1 , Marcin Starzak  2 , Bogusz Suchecki  3 , Maciej Czaplicki  3 , Nenad Stojiljković  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The Effects of Assisted and Resisted Plyometric Training Programs on Vertical Jump Performance in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hubert Makaruk et al. J Sports Sci Med. .

Abstract

Traditional, assisted and resisted plyometrics are considered to be effective training methods for improving vertical jump performance. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare effectiveness of traditional, assisted and resisted plyometric methods on vertical jumping ability in adults. Available literature was searched using MEDLINE (via EBSCO), SPORTDiscus (via EBSCO), Scopus and Web of Science databases. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the PEDro scale. Peer-reviewed studies were accepted only if they met all eligibility criteria: (a) healthy adults mean age > 18 years (b) training program based on plyometric exercises (c) the study reported on vertical jump height for the countermovement jump or drop jump performance. Of the 5092 articles identified, 17 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. Both funnel plot analysis and Egger's test (p = 0.04) indicated publication bias for the comparison of resisted plyometrics and control condition. No publication bias was found for the other meta-analyses (p > 0.05). The effects of the traditional and assisted plyometric methods, when compared with the control condition (a non-plyometric condition), on jump height were moderate (SMD = 0.68, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.99, p < 0.0001; SMD = 0.70, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.20, p = 0.006, respectively). The effects of the resisted plyometric methods, when compared with the control condition, on a jump height was small (SMD = 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.79, p = 0.002). There were no significant differences between the training effects of the assisted and traditional plyometric interventions on jump height (SMD = 0.62, 95% CI -1.66 to 2.91, p = 0.59), nor between the resisted and traditional plyometric training programs (SMD = 0.2, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.23, p = 0.86). Traditional, assisted and resisted plyometric methods are effective training modalities for augmenting vertical jump performance in healthy adults. Resisted and assisted plyometric methods are equally effective as the traditional plyometric method in improving vertical jumping ability in healthy adults.

Keywords: Plyometric exercise; human physical conditioning; lower limb; resistance training; stretch-shortening cycle; vertical jump.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The flow chart of the study selection process. VJH – vertical jump height.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Forest plot summarizing the effects of traditional plyometrics vs. control on vertical jump height. Data reflects standardized mean differences. CI - confidence intervals.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Forest plot summarizing the effects of assisted plyometrics vs. control on vertical jump height. Data reflects standardized mean differences. CI - confidence intervals.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Forest plot summarizing the effects of resisted plyometrics vs. control on vertical jump height. Data reflects standardized mean differences. CI - confidence intervals.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Forest plot summarizing the effects of traditional vs. assisted plyometrics on vertical jump height. Data reflects standardized mean differences. CI - confidence intervals.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Forest plot summarizing the effects of traditional vs. resisted plyometrics on vertical jump height, including training status (subgroup analysis). Data reflects standardized mean differences. CI - confidence intervals.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Altman D.G. (1991) Some common problems in medical research. Altman DG, Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall; 403–409.
    1. Arazi H., Coetzee B., Asadi A. (2012) Comparative effect of land- and aquatic-based plyometric training on jumping ability and agility of young basketball players. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation 34, 1-14.
    1. Arazi H., Mohammadi M., Asadi A. (2014) Muscular adaptations to depth jump plyometric training: Comparison of sand vs. land surface. Interventional Medicine and Applied Science 6, 125-130. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Argus C., Gill N.D., Keogh J.W.L., Blazevich A.J., Hopkins W.J. (2011) Kinetic and training comparisons between assisted, resisted, and free countermovement jumps. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 25, 2219-2227. - PubMed
    1. Arteaga R., Dorado C., Chavarren J., Calbet J.A.L. (2000) Reliability of jumping performance in active men and women under different stretch loading conditions. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 40, 26-34. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources