Abstract

Background

Running economy is defined as the energy demand at submaximal running speed, a key determinant of overall running performance. Strength training can improve running economy, although the magnitude of its effect may depend on factors such as the strength training method and the speed at which running economy is assessed.

Aim

To compare the effect of different strength training methods (e.g., high loads, plyometric, combined methods) on the running economy in middle- and long-distance runners, over different running speeds, through a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted across several electronic databases including Web of Science, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and SCOPUS. Using different keywords and Boolean operators for the search, all articles indexed up to November 2022 were considered for inclusion. In addition, the PICOS criteria were applied: Population: middle- and long-distance runners, without restriction on sex or training/competitive level; Intervention: application of a strength training method for ≥ 3 weeks (i.e., high loads (≥ 80% of one repetition maximum); submaximal loads [40–79% of one repetition maximum); plyometric; isometric; combined methods (i.e., two or more methods); Comparator: control group that performed endurance running training but did not receive strength training or received it with low loads (< 40% of one repetition maximum); Outcome: running economy, measured before and after a strength training intervention programme; Study design: randomized and non-randomized controlled studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis and moderator analysis were performed using R software (version 4.2.1).

Results

The certainty of the evidence was found to be moderate for high load training, submaximal load training, plyometric training and isometric training methods and low for combined methods. The studies included 195 moderately trained, 272 well trained, and 185 highly trained athletes. The strength training programmes were between 6 and 24 weeks’ duration, with one to four sessions executed per week. The high load and combined methods induced small (ES = − 0.266, p = 0.039) and moderate (ES = − 0.426, p = 0.018) improvements in running economy at speeds from 8.64 to 17.85 km/h and 10.00 to 14.45 km/h, respectively. Plyometric training improved running economy at speeds ≤ 12.00 km/h (small effect, ES = − 0.307, p = 0.028, β₁ = 0.470, p = 0.017). Compared to control groups, no improvement in running economy (assessed speed: 10.00 to 15.28 and 9.75 to 16.00 km/h, respectively) was noted after either submaximal or isometric strength training (all, p > 0.131). The moderator analyses showed that running speed (β₁ = − 0.117, p = 0.027) and VO₂max (β₁ = − 0.040, p = 0.020) modulated the effect of high load strength training on running economy (i.e., greater improvements at higher speeds and higher VO₂max).

Conclusions

Compared to a control condition, strength training with high loads, plyometric training, and a combination of strength training methods may improve running economy in middle- and long-distance runners. Other methods such as submaximal load training and isometric strength training seem less effective to improve running economy in this population. Of note, the data derived from this systematic review suggest that although both high load training and plyometric training may improve running economy, plyometric training might be effective at lower speeds (i.e., ≤ 12.00 km/h) and high load strength training might be particularly effective in improving running economy (i) in athletes with a high VO₂max, and (ii) at high running speeds.

Protocol Registration

The original protocol was registered (https://osf.io/gyeku) at the Open Science Framework.

中文翻译：

---

不同跑步速度下力量训练计划对中长跑运动员经济性的影响：荟萃分析的系统评价

摘要

背景

跑步经济性被定义为次最大跑步速度下的能量需求，是整体跑步表现的关键决定因素。力量训练可以改善跑步经济性，尽管其效果的大小可能取决于力量训练方法和跑步经济性评估速度等因素。

目的

通过荟萃分析的系统评价，比较不同跑步速度下不同力量训练方法（例如高负荷、增强式、组合方法）对中长跑运动员跑步经济性的影响。

方法

对多个电子数据库进行了系统检索，包括 Web of Science、PubMed、SPORTDiscus 和 SCOPUS。使用不同的关键字和布尔运算符进行搜索，截至 2022 年 11 月索引的所有文章都被考虑纳入。此外，还适用PICOS标准：人群：中长跑运动员，不限性别或训练/竞技水平；干预：应用力量训练方法≥3周（即高负荷（≥一次重复最大负荷的80%）；次最大负荷[一次重复最大负荷的40-79%）；增强式训练；等距；组合方法（即两种或多种方法）；比较：对照组进行耐力跑训练，但未接受力量训练或接受低负荷训练（< 一次重复最大值的 40%）；结果：跑步经济性，在力量训练干预计划之前和之后进行测量；研究设计：随机和非随机对照研究。证据的确定性采用 GRADE 方法进行评估。使用 R 软件（版本 4.2.1）进行三水平随机效应荟萃分析和调节分析。

结果

研究发现，高负荷训练、次最大负荷训练、增强式训练和等长训练方法的证据质量为中等，而组合方法的证据质量较低。这些研究包括 195 名接受过中等训练的运动员、272 名训练有素的运动员和 185 名训练有素的运动员。力量训练计划持续6至24周，每周进行1至4次。高负载和组合方法在 8.64 至 17.85 km/h 和 10.00 至 14.45 km/h 的速度下，对行驶经济性产生了小幅（ES = − 0.266，p  = 0.039）和中度（ES = − 0.426， p  = 0.018）改善。 ， 分别。增强式训练提高了速度 ≤ 12.00 km/h 时的跑步经济性（影响较小，ES = − 0.307，p  = 0.028，β ₁  = 0.470，p  = 0.017）。与对照组相比，次最大强度或等长力量训练后，跑步经济性没有改善（评估速度：分别为 10.00 至 15.28 公里/小时和 9.75 至 16.00 公里/小时）（全部，p >  0.131）。调节分析表明，跑步速度 ( β ₁  = − 0.117，p  = 0.027) 和V O ₂ max ( β ₁  = − 0.040，p  = 0.020) 调节高负荷力量训练对跑步经济性的影响（即更大程度的改善）在更高的速度和更高的V O ₂ max 下）。

结论

与控制条件相比，高负荷力量训练、增强式训练以及力量训练方法的组合可以提高中长跑运动员的跑步经济性。其他方法，例如次最大负荷训练和等长力量训练，似乎对于改善这一人群的跑步经济性效果较差。值得注意的是，该系统综述得出的数据表明，虽然高负荷训练和增强式训练都可以提高跑步经济性，但增强式训练可能在较低速度（即≤ 12.00 km/h）下有效，而高负荷力量训练可能尤其有效。有效提高 (i) 最大摄氧量 ( VO ₂ max ) 较高的运动员的跑步经济性，以及 (ii) 高跑步速度时的跑步经济性。

协议注册

原始协议已在开放科学框架中注册（https://osf.io/gyeku）。