| Literature DB >> 35736820 |
João C A Bueno1,2, Heloiana Faro3, Seth Lenetsky4,5, Aleksandro F Gonçalves6, Stefane B C D Dias7, André L B Ribeiro8, Bruno V C da Silva9, Carlos A Cardoso Filho10,11, Bruna M de Vasconcelos5, Júlio C Serrão10, Alexandro Andrade2, Tácito P Souza-Junior1, João G Claudino10,11,12.
Abstract
This review aimed to analyze the findings in the literature related to Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) through an exploratory systematic review and to present the state of the art from a multifactorial perspective. The review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement, with a search performed in the Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Participants were competitive athletes (amateurs or professionals) of regional, national, or international levels. Of the 2763 registries identified, 112 studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled sample size and age were 20,784 participants, with a mean age of 27.7 ± 6 years for male and 28.9 ± 3 years for female, with the vast majority of athletes being male (94.9%). MMA athletes were 17.2% amateurs, 73.8% professionals, and 9% were not reported. The scientific literature related to MMA reported injuries (n = 28), weight loss (n = 21), technical and tactical analysis (n = 23), physical fitness (n = 8), physiological responses and training characteristics (n = 13), psychobiological parameters (n = 12), and interventions applied to MMA athletes (n = 7). Therefore, this exploratory systematic review presents practitioners and researchers with seven broad summaries of each facet of performance of importance in this population of athletes.Entities:
Keywords: MMA; injuries; psychobiological; technical and tactical analysis; weight loss
Year: 2022 PMID: 35736820 PMCID: PMC9227211 DOI: 10.3390/sports10060080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sports (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4663
Figure 1Study selection PRISMA flow diagram.
Figure 2Main findings regarding injuries in MMA athletes.
Figure 3Main findings regarding weight loss in MMA Athletes.
Compare technical–tactical, time–motion, motor action, and spatiotemporal characteristics among weight divisions, sex, and fight outcomes.
| Study | Objective | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of time–motion between male weight divisions and rounds in 2097 bouts of UFC events. | Heavyweight athletes presented a shorter high effort time in the first and third rounds. Fly- and lightweight divisions also spent more time in low-intensity in the first round. In the second round, bantamweight spent a shorter time performing lower-intensity actions than fly- and lightweight division. Featherweight spent more time performing high-intensity groundwork than fly-, light-, and middleweight divisions. In the third round, bantamweight spent more time executing groundwork at high intensity than the four other divisions. |
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of time–motion and technical–tactical analysis between sexes and weight categories (light- and middleweight) in UFC fights. | Male middleweight athletes spent a longer time in standing activity (striking or standing in preparatory activity) than other sex/divisions and longer time on groundwork than male lightweight. Male lightweight presented longer standing fight activity than the other sex/divisions and spend more time between actions in both standing and on groundwork when compared to female middleweight. |
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of time–motion and technical–tactical analysis between rounds and between winners and losers. | Winners presented higher total strikes and takedown attempts in the first round. Furthermore, the winners performed a higher total of head and body strike attempts in the first and second rounds than in the third round. Submission attempts were more frequent in the first round, while advances in the mount and half-guard were more frequent in the second round. Regarding combat phases, in the third quartile of the first round, the time spent in low-intensity activity was higher than in the third round. In the third quartile of the third round, the time spend on low-intensity activity was higher than in the second round. |
| Brito et al. [ | Comparison of the motor actions of winners and losers with consideration of doping status. | Athletes who tested positive for doping had a higher physical performance, such as effort and pause time, however, doping did not reflect better technical performance. |
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of-motion and technical–tactical analysis between rounds of female combats in the UFC. | The total strike attempts, head strike attempts while standing, and total leg strike attempts while standing were higher in bouts finished by judges’ decision. Total body strike attempts were more frequent in fights ended by split decision. Total head strike attempts in groundwork position and advances to half guard were higher in bouts finished by KO/TKO than by decision. Passes to side control were higher in fights ended vis submission than decision. Advance to mount was higher in bouts finished by unanimous decision than by KO/TKO. Submission attempts were greater in bouts finished by submission than all others. |
| Dal Bello et al. [ | Comparison of grappling actions to fight outcomes. | Takedown attempts were more frequent in fights finished by judges’ decision than by KO/TKO. Takedown success was more frequent in decision and KO/TKO finished bouts than those finished by submission. Total submission attempts were more frequent in decision and KO/TKO than in bouts won by submission. All type choke attempts were more frequent in bouts finished by decision than those by submission. |
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of time–motion and technical–tactical analysis between rounds. | The percentage of low-intensity activity was more prevalent in the fifth round, while the percentage of high-intensity activities was more prevalent in the fourth round. In the first and fourth rounds, strikes attempts were less frequent than in the first and second rounds. |
| Miarka et al. [ | Comparison of home advantage effect on time–motion and technical–tactical analysis | Total strikes landed and attempted and head and body strike attempts were lower when the athletes were in home advantage. |
Figure 4Main findings regarding technical and tactical analysis in MMA Athletes.
Figure 5Main findings regarding physical fitness and performance in MMA Athletes.
Mean ± SD of testosterone and cortisol values in MMA fighters at selected moments.
| Testosterone (nmol·L−1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (−24 h) | (−1 h) | 0 h | +24 h | |
| Winners | 20.05 ± 2.13 * | 15.90 ± 1.18 * | 11.92 ± 1.79 * | 17.75 ± 2.00 * |
| Losers | 15.91 ± 2.40 * | 10.16 ± 3.52 * | 7.14 ± 2.73 * | 11.61 ± 1.79 * |
| Total | 17.98 ± 3.06 * | 13.03 ± 3.90 * | 9.53 ± 3.33 * | 14.68 ± 4.02 * |
| Cortisol (nmol·L−1) | ||||
| Winners | 580.63 ± 83.18 * | 706.00 ± 64.65 * | 949.98 ± 59.20 * | 522.22 ± 73.69 * |
| Losers | 387.29 ± 147.64 Υ | 482.03 ± 180.55 * | 802.21 ± 94.43 * | 351.69 ± 109.86 Υ |
| Total | 483.96 ± 153.10 * | 594.02 ± 144.99 * | 876.09 ± 107.84 * | 436.96 ± 126.26 * |
| Testosterone/Cortisol | ||||
| Winners | 34.76 ± 2.38 Υ | 22.56 ± 8.52 * | 12.49 ± 1.10 * | 34.13 ± 1.43 Υ |
| Losers | 40.15 ± 4.88 * | 22.85 ± 7.70 * | 8.66 ± 2.42 * | 10.57 ± 2.69 * |
| Total | 37.45 ± 4.65 * | 22.70 ± 5.31 * | 10.57 ± 2.69 * | 34.30 ± 4.73 * |
Table provided with authorship by Souza et al. [104]: * p < 0.05 compared with other moments; Υ p < 0.05 compared with other moments with the exception of −24 h and +24 h; p < 0.05 between losers and winners.
Mean ± SD of glucose, lactate and creatine kinase values in MMA fighters at selected moments.
| Glucose (mg/dl) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (−24 h) | (−1 h) | 0 h | +24 h | |
| Winners | 4.48 ± 0.35 * | 5.43 ± 0.83 * | 11.73 ± 2.30 * | 4.03 ± 0.21 * |
| Losers | 3.80 ± 0.44 Υ | 4.20 ± 0.49 * | 8.27 ± 1.33 *¶ | 3.62 ± 0.18 * |
| Total | 4.14 ± 0.52 * | 4.81 ± 0.92 * | 10.00 ± 2.55 * | 3.82 ± 0.28 * |
| Lactate (nmol·L−1) | ||||
| Winners | 1.32 ± 0.47 * | 2.02 ± 0.61 Υ | 2.37 ± 3.18 * | 1.72 ± 0.68 Υ |
| Losers | 1.44 ± 0.27 * | 2.22 ± 0.42 * | 3.88 ± 1.30 * | 1.82 ± 0.47 * |
| Total | 1.38 ± 0.38 * | 2.12 ± 0.52 * | 13.13 ± 2.51 * | 1.77 ± 0.52 * |
| Creatine Kinase (U/L) | ||||
| Winners | 510.17 ± 288.12 Φ | 418.31 ± 277.67 + | 491.40 ± 278.08 + | 1304.73 ± 904.13 * |
| Losers | 553.13 ± 128.31 ? | 449.46 ± 144.27 * | 492.21 ± 155.19 + | 1520.48 ± 609.66 * |
| Total | 531.15 ± 218.19 * | 433.89 ± 215.95 * | 491.81 ± 219.17 + | 1412.69 ± 758.63 * |
Table provided with authorship by Souza et al. [104]: * p < 0.05 compared with other moments; Υ p < 0.05 compared with other moments with the exception of −1 h and +24 h; Φ p < 0.05 compared with other moments with the exception of −1 h and 0 h; + p < 0.05 compared with other moments with the exception of −24 h; ? p < 0.05 compared with other moments with the exception of 0 h; p < 0001 between losers and winners. ¶ p < 0.05 between Losers and Winner.
Figure 6Main findings regarding physiological responses and training characteristics in MMA athletes.
Figure 7Main findings regarding psychobiological parameters in MMA Athletes.
Figure 8Main findings regarding interventions applied in MMA Athletes.