J Vicens-Bordas1, E Esteve2, A Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe3, T Bandholm4, K Thorborg5. 1. Sportclínic, Physiotherapy and Sports Training Centre, Spain; School of Health and Sport Sciences (EUSES), Universitat de Girona, Spain. Electronic address: jordi.vicensb@cadscrits.udg.edu. 2. Sportclínic, Physiotherapy and Sports Training Centre, Spain; School of Health and Sport Sciences (EUSES), Universitat de Girona, Spain. 3. Blanquerna Faculty of Psychology, Education Sciences and Sport (FPCEE), Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain; School of Health and Sport Sciences (EUSES), Universitat de Girona, Spain. 4. Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Research - Copenhagen (PMR-C), Department of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Clinical Research Center, Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University, Denmark. 5. Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Research - Copenhagen (PMR-C), Department of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Clinical Research Center, Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University, Denmark; Sports Orthopedic Research Center - Copenhagen (SORC-C), Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this systematic review was to determine if inertial flywheel resistance training is superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in improving muscle strength. The secondary aim was to determine whether inertial flywheel resistance training is superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in improving other muscular adaptations. DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analyses of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials with no publication date restrictions until November 2016. We performed meta-analyses on randomised and non-randomised controlled trials to determine the standardized mean difference between the effects of inertial flywheel and gravity-dependent resistance training on muscle strength. A total of 76 and 71 participants were included in the primary and secondary analyses, respectively. RESULTS: After systematic review, we included three randomised and four non-randomised controlled trials. In the primary analysis for the primary outcome muscle strength, the pooled results from randomised controlled trials showed no difference (SMD=-0.05; 95%CI -0.51 to 0.40; p=0.82; I2=0%). In the secondary analyses of the primary outcome, the pooled results from non-randomised controlled trials showed no difference (SMD=0.02; 95%CI -0.45 to 0.49; p=0.93; I2=0%; and SMD=0.03; 95%CI -0.43 to 0.50; p=0.88; I2=0%). Meta-analysis on secondary outcomes could not be performed. CONCLUSION: Based on the available data, inertial flywheel resistance training was not superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in enhancing muscle strength. Data for other strength variables and other muscular adaptations was insufficient to draw firm conclusions from.
OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this systematic review was to determine if inertial flywheel resistance training is superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in improving muscle strength. The secondary aim was to determine whether inertial flywheel resistance training is superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in improving other muscular adaptations. DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analyses of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials with no publication date restrictions until November 2016. We performed meta-analyses on randomised and non-randomised controlled trials to determine the standardized mean difference between the effects of inertial flywheel and gravity-dependent resistance training on muscle strength. A total of 76 and 71 participants were included in the primary and secondary analyses, respectively. RESULTS: After systematic review, we included three randomised and four non-randomised controlled trials. In the primary analysis for the primary outcome muscle strength, the pooled results from randomised controlled trials showed no difference (SMD=-0.05; 95%CI -0.51 to 0.40; p=0.82; I2=0%). In the secondary analyses of the primary outcome, the pooled results from non-randomised controlled trials showed no difference (SMD=0.02; 95%CI -0.45 to 0.49; p=0.93; I2=0%; and SMD=0.03; 95%CI -0.43 to 0.50; p=0.88; I2=0%). Meta-analysis on secondary outcomes could not be performed. CONCLUSION: Based on the available data, inertial flywheel resistance training was not superior to gravity-dependent resistance training in enhancing muscle strength. Data for other strength variables and other muscular adaptations was insufficient to draw firm conclusions from.
Authors: Edvard H Sagelv; Sigurd Pedersen; Lars Petter R Nilsen; Andrea Casolo; Boye Welde; Morten B Randers; Svein Arne Pettersen Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Date: 2020-10-02
Authors: Marko D M Stojanović; Mladen Mikić; Patrik Drid; Julio Calleja-González; Nebojša Maksimović; Bogdan Belegišanin; Veselin Sekulović Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Niklas Westblad; Henrik Petré; Andreas Kårström; Niklas Psilander; Glenn Björklund Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-27 Impact factor: 3.390