The effects of plyometric training on adolescent sports performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis


Abstract

Background: Plyometric training (PT) is widely acknowledged as an effective approach for enhancing sports performance among adolescents, particularly in terms of explosive power, speed, and agility. Nevertheless, the specific effects of PT on distinct performance metrics within this demographic remain inadequately defined. This study seeks to thoroughly examine the impact of PT on various sports performance indicators in adolescent athletes by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Relevant literature published up to January 1, 2025, was sourced from databases including Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase. The analysis incorporated randomized controlled trials involving adolescents aged 10 to 19 years, focusing on the effects of PT on performance measures such as jumping, sprinting, and agility, with intervention durations of at least six weeks. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. Data synthesis and subgroup analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4 software, and methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Results: The analysis included 63 studies involving a total of 4,904 participants. The intervention periods ranged from 6 to 26 weeks, with training sessions occurring 2 to 5 times per week, each lasting 30 to 120 minutes. The meta-analysis indicated that PT significantly enhanced adolescent jump performance (SMD= 0.78, 95% CI: 0.62,0.94, P < 0.001), sprint performance (SMD = −0.55, 95% CI: −0.69, −0.41, P < 0.001), and agility performance (SMD = −0.91, 95% CI: −1.24, −0.59, P < 0.001), with all results achieving statistical significance (p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that physical training (PT) conducted over a duration of 10 to 26 weeks significantly improved various sports performance metrics among adolescents, including jumping ability (SMD = 1.03), sprint speed (SMD = −1.20), and agility (SMD = −0.69). Notably, the enhancement in jumping ability was significantly more pronounced in males (SMD = 0.85) compared to females (SMD = 0.43). In contrast, females exhibited significantly greater improvements in sprint performance (SMD = −0.89) relative to males (SMD = −0.52). Furthermore, PT was found to substantially enhance agility (SMD = −1.45) and sprint performance (SMD = −1.01) among adolescents engaged in handball, while also improving jumping performance (SMD = 0.90) in those participating in volleyball.

Conclusion: PT is recognized as an effective intervention for improving sports performance in adolescents, with substantial positive outcomes observed in jumping, sprinting, and agility. Evidence suggests that extended interventions, lasting 10 weeks or more, result in more significant enhancements, with gender and sport discipline identified as pivotal factors affecting performance improvements.

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024627316.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].