| Literature DB >> 31729638 |
Ashley Cox1, Stuart J Fairclough2, Maria-Christina Kosteli2, Robert J Noonan3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that boys' and girls' physical activity (PA) levels decline throughout adolescence. Boys are at risk of physical inactivity during adolescence; however, in intervention research, they are an under-represented group relative to girls. It is suggested that the school environment may be central to developing interventions that support adolescents in meeting the current PA guidelines. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of school-based physical activity interventions for improving muscular fitness (MF) in adolescent males.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31729638 PMCID: PMC7018678 DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01215-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sports Med ISSN: 0112-1642 Impact factor: 11.136
Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram to show each stage of the systemic eligibility process
Quality assessment (risk of bias)
| Study | Appropriate sequence generation and/or randomisation | Allocation concealment and/or blinding | Complete outcome data and/or low withdrawal/dropout (< 20%) | Appropriate outcome measure (PA) | Quality score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. De Souza et al. (2015) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 2. Eather et al. (2016) [ | X | X | X | X | 4 |
| 3. Giannaki et al. (2016) [ | X | X | X | 3 | |
| 4. Kennedy et al. (2018) [ | X | X | X | 3 | |
| 5. Lloyd et al. (2012) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 6. Lloyd et al. (2016) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 7. Lubans et al. (2016) [ | X | X | X | 3 | |
| 8. Muehlbauer et al. (2012) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 9. Muntaner-mass and Palou (2017) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 10. Weeks and Beck (2012) [ | X | X | 2 | ||
| 11. Winwood and Buckley (2017) [ | X | X | 2 |
X = the study demonstrated appropriate steps to account for the respective risk of bias confounder
Characteristics of MF studies included in this systematic review. Letters a–l relate to individual outcome measures and are displayed combined where studies have reported multiple methods for a single outcome in subsequent forest plots
| Study and quality rating | Participants | Intervention, duration, and measurement period | PA measurement method and PA outcome measure |
|---|---|---|---|
De Souza et al. (2015) Brazil [ | Total: Mean age: 12.8 ± 0.6 Control: Mass (kg): 54 ± 10 Height (m): 1.57 ± 0.7 BMI: 22 ± 3 Intervention: Mass (kg): 52 ± 9 Height (m): 1.60 ± 0.8 BMI: 20 ± 2 | 12 weeks, completing two 60 min sessions per week The calisthenics exercise group performed a 10-min warm-up (running) followed by five calisthenics strength exercises: (a) wide-grip push-ups; (b) squat or lunge; (c) fixed bar inverted row; (d) curl ups; and (e) narrow-grip push-ups) | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Horizontal jump: the subjects performed the horizontal jump test. The best distance (in centimetres) of three attempts was recorded (b) Push-ups in 1 min: the subjects performed the maximum number of repetitions in 1 min (c) Curl ups: the subjects performed the maximum number of repetitions in 1 min |
Eather et al. (2016) Australia [ | Total: Mean age: 15.3 ± 0.47 Mass (kg): 65.1 ± 12.3 Height (m): 1.77 ± 0.72 BMI: 21.3 ± 3.4 Control: Intervention: | 8 weeks, completing 2, 60 min sessions per week Sessions were delivered by crossfit coaches. A typical session included a dynamic warm-up (10 min), a technique-based skill session (10 min), a workout of the day (10–20 min), a stretching session (5–10 min), and time allocated for organisation, transition, and changing into sportswear (10 min) | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Push-up tests (reps) (b) Curl up test (reps) (c) Standing jump (m) (d) Grip strength (Kg) Guided by the FitnessGram protocol |
Giannaki et al. (2016) Cyprus [ | Total: Mean age: 16 Control: Mass (kg): 59.4 ± 13.7 Height (cm): 169.3 ± 8.9 BMI: 20.5 ± 2.9 Intervention: Mass (kg): 64.5 ± 13.0 Height (cm): 169.8 ± 6.4 BMI: 22.3 ± 3.7 | 8 weeks, completing two sessions per week Circuit training was performed in a group setting, where the students completed 20 min consisted of two cycles of eight exercises (stations) with 30-s exercise—30-s rest between sets and 3-min rest between cycles. The circuit training included push-ups, tricep dips, step-on-the-box, wall ball (squats holding a 2 kg medicine ball and then throwing the ball on the wall on the ascent), bicep curls with elastic bands for resistance, sit-ups, standing calf raises with medicine ball, and back raises. The circuit training program was altered in the last 4 weeks of the intervention. Changes were made both in the volume and frequency of the exercises, reaching the total number of exercises (stations) to 10, whilst the resting period between each exercise was reduced by 15 s | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Hand-grip strength (kg) left (b) Hand-grip strength (kg) right (c) Vertical jump (cm) |
Kennedy et al. (2018) Australia [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 14.2 ± 0.5 Intervention: Mean age: 14.1 ± 0.4 | 10-week school term, with pre-test and post-test data collection occurring in the preceding and ensuing school terms to the intervention, respectively [i.e., pre-tests occurred in term 2 (April–June), the intervention was delivered in term 3 (July–September), and post-test occurred during term 4 (October–December)]. This resulted in an approximate period of 6 months between pre-test and post-test measurements The structured physical activity program followed a specified session format, including: (i) movement-based games and dynamic stretching warm-up; (ii) RT skill development; (iii) high-intensity RT (HIRT) workout; (iv) modified game involving fitness infusion, boxing or core strength activity; (v) static stretching, reinforcement of behavioural changes | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Push-ups (reps) (b) Standing long jump (m) |
Lloyd et al. (2012) UK [ | Total: Control 1: Mean age: 12.23 ± 0.28 Mass (kg): 47.38 ± 13.91 Height (cm): 151.67 ± 6.93 Intervention 1: Mean age: 12.29 ± 0.31 Mass (kg): 44.78 ± 9.42 Height (cm): 151.89 ± 7.94 Control 2: Mean age: 15.29 ± 0.33 Mass (kg): 63.70 ± 11.43 Height (cm): 174.11 ± 9.20 Intervention 2: Mean age: 15.33 ± 0.27 Mass (kg): 64.96 ± 8.89 Height (cm): 174.35 ± 6.63 | 4 weeks of 2 × sessions per week Training volume was defined by the number of foot contacts made during each session, starting with 72 contacts in the first session, increasing to 106 contacts in the final two sessions. Plyometric drills lasted approximately 5–10 s, and at least 90 s rest was allowed after each set Plyometric drills included standing vertical and horizontal jumps, lateral jumps, ankle hops, skipping, single-leg hopping, maximal hopping, and low-level drop jumps (20 cm) Measurements taken pre- and post-intervention | Muscle/bone strengthening Reactive Strength Index (millimetres per millisecond). Reactive strength index (RSI) was determined during the maximal hopping test, which involved the participants performing five repeated bilateral maximal vertical hops on the contact mat. The participants were instructed to maximise jump height and minimise ground contact time. The first jump in each trial was discounted, whereas the remaining four hops were averaged for the analysis of RSI (a) Intervention 1, pre-peak height velocity (b) Intervention 2, post-peak height velocity |
Lloyd et al. (2016) UK [ | Total: Participants were divided into 4 groups, plyometric training, traditional strength training, combined training and control | Two sessions per week for 6 weeks Within traditional strength training sessions, participants completed three sets of ten repetitions of a barbell back squat, barbell lunge, dumbbell step up, and leg press. To enable the prescription of individualized training intensities, ten repetition maximum (10RM) loads were calculated for participants in the traditional strength training group before the start of the training period. Progressive overload (5%) was implemented following technical competency Plyometric training prescription included a combination of exercises that were geared toward developing both safe jumping and landing mechanics (e.g., drop landings, vertical jumps in place, and single-leg forward hop and stick) and also to stress stretch-shortening cycle activity (e.g., pogo hopping, drop jumps, and multiple horizontal re-bounds). Within each session, participants were exposed to multiple sets of four exercises to enable sufficient repetition to develop motor control programs. (week 1 foot contacts = 74 per session; week 6 foot contacts = 88 per session) The combined training program involved exposure to two traditional strength training exercises (barbell back squat and barbell lunge) and two varied plyometric exercises, each session taken from the plyometric training program Measurements taken pre- and post-intervention | Muscle/bone strengthening Squat jump height (cm) Pre-PHV–Post-PHV Plyometric training: a, d Traditional strength: b, e Combined training: c, f Reactive Strength Index (millimetres per millisecond) Pre-PHV–Post-PHV Plyometric training: g, j Traditional training: h, k Combined training: i, l |
Lubans et al. (2016) Australia [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 12.7 ± 0.5 Mass (kg): 53.1 ± 13.4 Height (cm): 160.2 ± 8.4 BMI: 20.5 ± 4.1 Intervention: Mean age: 12.7 ± 0.5 Mass (kg): 54.0 ± 15 Height (cm): 160.9 ± 9.0 BMI: 20.5 ± 4.1 | 20-week, 20 × 90-min sessions delivered by teachers during school sport periods in addition to regular PE. Lunch time sessions run by students, 6 × 20-min sessions Each session included the following structure: (i) warm-up: movement-based games and dynamic stretches; (ii) resistance training skill development: resistance band and body weight exercise circuit; (iii) fitness challenge: short duration, high-intensity Crossfit™-style workout performed individually with the aim of completing the workout as quickly as possible; (iv) modified games: minor strength and aerobic- based games (e.g., sock wrestling and tag-style games) and small-sided ball games that maximise participation and active learning time (e.g., touch football); and (v) cool down Measurements taken at baseline, 8 months, and 18 months | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Push-up test, FITNESSGRAM protocol (b) Hand-grip strength (kg) |
Muehlbauer et al. (2012) Germany [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 16.9 ± 0.7 Mass (kg): 66.7 ± 7.5 Height (cm): 182.6 ± 6.3 BMI: 20 ± 2.0 Intervention: Mean age: 16.8 ± 0.8 Mass (kg): 68.8 ± 2.6 Height (cm): 181.8 ± 6.5 BMI: 21.1 ± 1.7 | 8 weeks, two sessions per week. Exercises; Squats, leg press, calf-raise, hip abduction/adduction, leg extension/ flexion Training volume; 8-week training period with a total of 16 sessions; each session lasted 90 min (10-min warm-up, 70-min resistance training, and 10-min cool down) Training frequency two training sessions a week separated by approximately 48 h. Training intensity 30–40% of the one-repetition maximum. Training intensity was examined for each participant on a fortnightly basis by means of one-repetition maximum tests; if necessary, the training load was adjusted Measurements taken at pre and post-intervention | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Maximal isometric force, leg press (b) Rate of force development, leg press (c) Counter-movement jump height |
Muntaner-mass and Palou (2017) Spain [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 15.8 ± 0.5 Mass (kg): 64.0 ± 10.8 BMI: 21.1 ± 3.0 Intervention: Mean age: 15.9 ± 0.6 Mass (kg): 64.7 ± 12.0 BMI: 21.4 ± 3.3 | 5 months, two sessions per week The intervention consisted of a circuit of ten stations, where a high-intensity activity was performed at each one. The authors do not provide a list of the activities at each station to discuss the movements utilised. Due to the large number of movements delivered at a high intensity, this study was categorised as combined activities Measurements taken at pre- and post-intervention | Muscle/bone strengthening (a) Hand-grip strength (kg) left (b) Hand-grip strength (kg) right (c) Standing broad jump (cm) |
Weeks and Beck. (2012) Australia [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 13.8 ± 0.4 Mass (kg): 58.6 ± 16.7 Height (m): 1.640 ± 0.086 BMI: 20.5 ± 4.3 Intervention: Mean age: 13.8 ± 0.4 Mass (kg): 55.0 ± 13.8 Height (m): 1.637 ± 0.098 BMI: 20.3 ± 3.6 | 8 months, two sessions per week consisting of 10 min Delivered at the beginning of a physical education lessons. Each bout of jumping comprised at least some of the following manoeuvres: jumps, hops, tuck jumps, jump squats, stride jumps, star jumps, lunges, side lunges, and skipping. Each 10-min session consisted of 300 jumps Measurements taken at pre- and post-intervention | Muscle/bone strengthening Vertical jump (cm) |
Winwood and Buckley. (2017) New Zealand [ | Total: Control: Mean age: 14.3 ± 0.5 Mass (kg): 63.2 ± 13.2 Height (cm): 174.1 ± 8.7 Intervention (bodyweight and mobility): Mean age: 14.2 ± 0.4 Mass (kg): 64.4 ± 12.2 Height (cm): 175.2 ± 8.1 Intervention (combined bodyweight, mobility and free weight resistance): Mean age: 14.3 ± 0.5 Mass (kg): 61.8 ± 13.1 Height (cm): 174.0 ± 9.6 | 7 weeks, 2–3 sessions The 7-week training intervention involved participants performing 2 body weight/mobility training sessions per week (Table Participants in the combined training group (CBT) performed two additional 60-min RT sessions in the same week but on different days to the BMT sessions. The focus of the training program was to enhance strength and improve fundamental movement patterns using key multi-joint movements Measurements taken at − 1 and + 2 | Muscle/bone strengthening Push-up tests (reps) (a) Bodyweight and mobility (b) Bodyweight, mobility, and weight resistance Horizontal jump (m) (c) Bodyweight and mobility (d) Bodyweight, mobility, and weight resistance Medicine ball throw (m) (e) Bodyweight and mobility (f) Bodyweight, mobility, and weight resistance Counter-movement jump (m) (g) Bodyweight and mobility (h) Bodyweight, mobility, and weight resistance |
Fig. 2Funnel plot of standard error by Hedge’s g
Fig. 3Individual study and pooled results of MF training outcomes. BW bodyweight, Trad traditional, Plyo plyometric, CA combined activities. Letters a and b were used to separate studies investigating more than one type of resistance training
Fig. 4Individual and pooled subgroup analyses of upper limb and lower limb MF outcomes. Studies with more than one outcome of MF are reported separately with the letter a allowing for separation between LL and UL outcomes. LL lower limb; UL upper limb
| MF interventions delivered in a school-based environment demonstrated small-to-moderate effects in adolescent boys. |
| MF delivered in a traditional manner, such as weight machines and free weights, may have a greater effect on enhancing MF than other forms of MF delivery. |
| Plyometric forms of MF delivery demonstrated significant homogeneous effects and require further quality research to assess their application in the school environment. |