The effect of integrated training program on functional movements patterns, dynamic stability, biomechanics, and muscle strength of lower limbs in elite young basketball players

Unilateral Plyometric Jump Training Shows Significantly More Effective than Bilateral Training in Improving Both Time to Stabilization and Peak Landing Force in Single-Leg Lend and Hold Test: A Randomized Multi-Arm Study Conducted Among Young Male Basketball Players

Enhancing peak landing forces and ensuring faster stabilization in the lower limbs during jumping activities can significantly improve performance and decrease the risk of injury among basketball players. This study aimed to compare the effects of unilateral (uPJT) and bilateral plyometric jump training (bPJT) programs on various performance measures, including countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), and single-leg land and hold (SLLH) test outcomes, assessed using force plates. A randomized multi-arm study design was employed, comprising two experimental groups (n = 25; uPJT and n = 25; bPJT) and one control group (n = 25), conducted with youth male regional-level basketball players (16.3 ± 0.6 years old). Participants underwent assessment twice, both before and after an 8-week intervention training period. The uPJT program exclusively involved plyometric drills (e.g., vertical jump exercises; horizontal jump exercises) focusing on single-leg exercises, whereas the bPJT program utilized drills involving both legs simultaneously. The outcomes analyzed included CMJ peak landing force, CMJ peak power, SJ peak force, SJ maximum negative displacement, SLLH time to stabilization, and SLLH peak landing force. The control group exhibited significantly greater SLLH time to stabilization compared to both the uPJT (p < 0.001) and bPJT (p < 0.030) groups. Additionally, time to stabilization was also significantly higher in bPJT than in uPJT (p = 0.042). Comparisons between groups in regards SLLH peak landing force after intervention revealed that the value was significantly smaller in uPJT than in bPJT (p = 0.043) and control (p < 0.001). In the remaining outcomes of CMJ and SJ, both uPJT and bPJT showed significant improvement compared to the control group (p > 0.05), although there was no significant difference between them. In conclusion, our study suggests that utilizing uPJT is equally effective as bPJT in enhancing performance in bilateral jump tests. However, it significantly outperforms bPJT in improving time to stabilization and peak landing forces during single-leg land and hold test. uPJT could be advantageous not for maximizing performance but also for potentially decreasing injury risk by enhancing control and balance during single-leg actions, which are common in basketball.

Landing error scoring system: A scoping review about variants, reference values and differences according to sex and sport

OBJECTIVE

The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is a movement analysis tool proposed to identify the risk of anterior cruciate ligament injuries, very useful for injury prevention. The aim of this study is to review the variants of the LESS, their normative scores and the differences according to sex and sport practiced.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus and ScienceDirect databases were searched from inception to October 19, 2023. Studies were eligible if the objective was finding normative or reference scores for the LESS, analyze the differences between sexes or sports, or used some variant of the test. Results were limited to available full-text articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals.

RESULTS

Of the 360 articles identified, 20 were included for a full analysis (18,093 participants, age = 8-30 years, males = 70.6%). The military population was the most frequently analyzed (7 studies, n = 16,603). Results showed six variants of the LESS and average values ranged from 2.56 to 7.1. Males and females showed different pattern landing with errors in different planes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the need for more field studies on LESS reference scores, particularly for females and basketball or hockey players. Further research is required before conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The effects of functional training on physical fitness and skill-related performance among basketball players: a systematic review

Background: Evidence suggests that functional training (FT) positively impacts physical fitness and sports performance. However, a systematic review addressing the effects of FT on basketball players remains absent. This systematic review aims to explore the influence of FT on physical fitness and skill-related performance in basketball players. Methods: We searched six databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar. The search utilized a combination of keywords related to FT, physical fitness, and basketball. The Eligibility Criteria of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines were followed in this systematic review. Results: 11 studies were ultimately included in this review, collectively recruiting 333 basketball players. These studies demonstrated that FT significantly improved muscle strength, linear speed, cardiovascular endurance, flexibility, balance, and muscular endurance. However, the effects of FT on power, change-of-direction speed, and basketball-related performance were inconsistent. Most studies showed FT significantly improves these three variables, but a small number of studies did not find positive effects of FT using specific tests including standing long jump, Sargent jump, touch high, lane agility, lateral shuffle, dribbling line drill, and free-throw tests. Conclusion: FT is an effective training method for enhancing physical fitness including muscle strength, linear speed, cardiovascular endurance, flexibility, balance, and muscular endurance. However, the effects of FT on power, change-of-direction speed, and basketball-related performance were divergent. Some tests were not improved after FT potentially due to the short program lengths and training session durations, varied athletic levels of players examined, and different foci of the FT exercises administered. The collective evidence suggests FT programs, especially the specific exercises prescribed, should be tailored to the desired training objectives. More studies investigating the effects of FT on physical fitness and basketball-related performance with established tests are encouraged in the future to expand the current evidence base. Systematic Review Registration: https://inplasy.com/, Identifier INPLASY202360072.

Effect of Footwear Versus Barefoot on Double-Leg Jump-Landing and Jump Height Measures: A Randomized Cross-Over Study

Background

Assessing individuals in their own athletic footwear in clinics is common, but can affect movement, performance, and clinical measures.

Purpose

The aim was to compare overall Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) scores, injury risk categorization, specific LESS errors, and jump heights between habitual athletic footwear and barefoot conditions.

Study design

Randomized cross-over laboratory study.

Methods

Eighty healthy individuals (55% male) completed the LESS following standard procedures (i.e., land from a 30-cm box to a distance of 50% of body height and then jump upwards maximally). Participants performed the LESS three times in two randomized conditions: footwear and barefoot. LESS data were extracted from 2D videos to compare group-level mean LESS scores, group-level and individual-level injury risk categorization (5-error threshold), specific landing errors, and jump heights between conditions.

Results

LESS scores were significantly greater (0.3 errors, p=0.022) and jump heights were significantly lower (0.6 cm, p=0.029) in footwear than barefoot, but differences were trivial (d = 0.18 and -0.07, respectively) and not clinically meaningful. Although the number of high injury-risk participants was not statistically different at a group level (p=1.000); 27 individuals (33.8%) exhibited a clinically meaningful difference between conditions of one error or more in LESS score, categorization was inconsistent for 16.3% of individuals, and four of the 17 landing errors significantly differed between conditions.

Conclusion

At a group level, habitual athletic footwear does not meaningfully influence LESS scores, risk categorization, or jump height. At an individual level, footwear can meaningfully affect LESS scores, risk categorization, and alter landing strategies. Use of consistent protocol and footwear is advised for assessing movement patterns and injury risk from the LESS given the unknown predictive value of this test barefoot.

Level of Evidence

Level 3.©The Author(s).

A randomised controlled trial of movement quality-focused exercise versus traditional resistance exercise for improving movement quality and physical performance in trained adults

The aim of this trial was to compare an eight-week individual movement quality versus traditional resistance training intervention on movement quality and physical performance. Forty-six trained adults were randomised to a movement quality-focused training (MQ) or a traditional resistance training (TRAD) group, and performed two individualised training sessions per week, for 8 weeks. Session-RPE (sRPE) was obtained from each session. Measures of movement quality (MovementSCREEN and Functional Movement Screen (FMS)) and physical performance were performed pre- and post-intervention. All measures improved significantly in both groups (3-14.5%, p = <0.005). The between-group difference in MovementSCREEN composite score was not statistically significant (0.3, 95% CI -3.4, 4.1, p = 0.852). However, change in FMS composite was significantly greater in MQ (1.3, 95% CI 0.8, 1.8, p < 0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in physical performance (p = 0.060-0.960). The mean sRPE was significantly lower in MQ (5.25, SD 1.2) compared to TRAD (6.6 SD 1.0, p = <0.001). Thus, although movement quality scores were not distinctly greater in the MQ group, a movement quality specific intervention caused comparable improvements in physical performance compared to traditional resistance training but at lower perceived training intensity.