| Literature DB >> 36101440 |
Alberto Roso-Moliner1, Elena Mainer-Pardos1, José Luis Arjol-Serrano1, Antonio Cartón-Llorente1, Hadi Nobari2,3,4,5, Demetrio Lozano1.
Abstract
(1) Background: This study was conducted to investigate the effects of a 10-week neuromuscular training program (NMT) on the sum of six skinfolds (Σ6S) and body composition variables in elite female soccer players. (2)Entities:
Keywords: body fat; football; kinanthropometry; lean body mass; strength training; women
Year: 2022 PMID: 36101440 PMCID: PMC9312219 DOI: 10.3390/biology11071062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biology (Basel) ISSN: 2079-7737
Descriptive data of the participants.
| Variable | Control Group ( | Experimental Group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | ||
| Age (years) | 24.61± 4.30 | 23.24 ± 4 | 0.31 |
| Height (cm) | 162.29 ± 5.90 | 166.09 ± 4.65 | 0.07 |
| Body Mass (kg) | 59.46 ± 6.22 | 61.61 ± 4.43 | 0.23 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.46 ± 2.54 | 22.37 ± 1.85 | 0.89 |
SD: standard deviation; BMI: body mass index.
Figure 1Participant recruitment, allocation, follow-up, and analysis are depicted in a CONSORT diagram. NMT: neuromuscular training; EG: experimental group; CG: control group.
Average macronutrient and energy intake.
| Variable | Control Group ( | Experimental Group ( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Registration | 2nd Registration | 1st Registration | 2nd Registration | ||
| Kilocalories (kcal/day) | 2206 ± 377 | 2222 ± 346 | 2266 ± 198 | 2285 ± 189.1 | 0.48 |
| Carbohydrates (g) | 311.9 ± 56.4 | 315.9 ± 47.9 | 336.9 ± 29.7 | 328.8 ± 29.1 | 0.13 |
| Proteins (g) | 92.9 ± 18.2 | 89.3 ± 13.2 | 90.8 ± 9.07 | 90.5 ± 10.6 | 0.56 |
| Fats (g) | 65.1 ± 12.1 | 66.8 ± 12.8 | 66.1 ± 6.79 | 67.8 ± 7.02 | 0.39 |
SD: standard deviation; kcal: kilocalories; g: grams.
Training intervention details.
| Group | Experimental ( | Control ( | Sum | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training | NMT | Mobility | Strength | RT | 9 Exercises |
| Training | Sets: 4 | Sets: 2 | Sets: 4 | Sets: 3 (4 reps) | Sets: 2–4 |
| Work | 7.3 ± 0.25 | 7.26 ± 0.23 | |||
NMT: neuromuscular training; reps: repetitions per set; s: seconds; RPE: rate of perceived exertion (0–10); RT: running technique; SD: standard deviation.
Figure 2Project design timeline. NMT: neuromuscular training; RAMP: rise, activate, mobilize, and potentiate.
Figure 3Average intensity (mean and standard deviation) using the modified Borg scale over the thirty training sessions. EG: experimental group; CG: control group.
Figure 4Neuromuscular training protocol.
Summary results of skinfold variables within the control group and neuromuscular training group.
| Skinfolds (mm) | Control Group ( | Experimental Group ( | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-Test | Post-Test | Pre-Post (%) |
| ES (95% CI) | Pre-Test | Post-Test | Pre-Post (%) |
| ES (95% CI) | |
| Subscapular | 9.62 ± 286 | 9.66 ± 2.85 | 0.41 | 0.143 | 0.01 (−0.64; 0.66) T | 8.64 ± 1.71 | 8.42± 1.73 | −2.54 | ≤0.001 * | −0.12 (−0.77; 0,53) T |
| Biceps | 4.97 ± 1.40 | 5.07 ± 1.41 | 2.01 | 0.008 * | 0.06 (−0.58; 0,72) T | 4.27 ± 1.23 | 4.10 ± 1.21 | −3.98 | 0.001 * | −0.13 (−0.78; 0.52) T |
| Triceps | 11.55 ± 3.42 | 11.63 ± 3.39 | 0,69 | 0.144 | 0.02 (−0.63; 0.67) T | 10.67 ± 3.34 | 10.45 ± 3.21 | −2.06 | 0.018 * | −0.06 (−0.71; 0.59) T |
| Supraspinal | 8.15 ± 3.24 | 8.22 ± 3.21 | 0.85 | 0.046 | 0.01 (−0.63; 0.67) T | 7.29 ± 2.38 | 7.16 ± 2.40 | −1.78 | ≤0.001 * | −0.05 (−0.70; 0.60) T |
| Iliac crest | 13.61 ± 4.84 | 13.69 ± 4.84 | 0.58 | 0.002 * | 0.02 (−0.64; 0.67) T | 13.86 ± 4.39 | 13.68 ± 4.41 | −1.29 | ≤0.001 * | −0.04 (−0.69; 0.61) T |
| Abdominal | 13.21 ± 4.84 | 13.27 ± 4.81 | 0.45 | 0.110 | 0.01 (−0.66; 0.67) T | 12.77 ± 4.23 | 12.54 ± 4.25 | −1.80 | 0.001 * | −0.06 (−0.70; 0.60) T |
| Front thigh | 17.76 ± 4.42 | 17.77 ± 4.42 | 0.05 | 0.181 | 0.01 (−0.65; 0.65) T | 17.14 ± 4.48 | 16.95 ± 4.49 | −1.10 | ≤0.001 * | −0.09 (−0.69; 0.61) T |
| Medial calf | 11.03 ± 3.21 | 11.05 ± 3.20 | 0.18 | 0.137 | 0.01 (−0.65; 0.65) T | 8.61 ± 2.82 | 8.43 ± 2.82 | −2.09 | ≤0.001 * | −0.06 (−0.71; 0,59) T |
| Σ6S | 71.32 ± 17.14 | 71.61 ± 16.99 | 0.40 | 0.019 * | 0.01 (−0.64; 0.67) T | 65.12 ± 11.61 | 63.95 ± 11.60 | −1.79 | ≤0.001 * | −0.09 (0.74; 0.55) T |
SD: standard deviation; ES: effect size; CI: confidence interval; T: trivial; Σ6S: sum of six skindfolds; * p < 0.05.
Figure 5Change in skinfold variables assessment for each group and assessment stage. * Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the EG (p < 0.05). # Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the CG (p < 0.05). EG: experimental group; CG: control group.
Summary results of other body composition variables within the control group and neuromuscular training group.
| Variable | Control Group ( | Experimental Group ( | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-Test | Post-Test | Pre-Post (%) |
| ES (95% CI4) | Pre-Test | Post-Test | Pre-Post (%) |
| ES (95% CI) | |
| Body mass (kg) | 59.46 ± 6.22 | 59.49 ± 6.21 | 0.05 | 0.468 | 0.01 (−0.65; 0.65) T | 61.59 ± 4.44 | 61.37 ± 4.45 | −0.35 | ≤0.001 * | −0.04 (−0.70; 0.60) T |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.46 ± 2.54 | 22.47 ± 2.53 | 0.04 | 0.497 | 0.01 (−0.65; 0.66) T | 22.36 ± 1.85 | 22.28 ± 1.81 | −0.35 | ≤0.001 * | −0.04 (−0.69; 0,61) T |
| Fat mass Withers (%) | 17.13 ± 3.57 | 17.21 ± 3.53 | 0.52 | 0.029 * | 0.02 (−0.64; 0.68) T | 15.42 ± 2.68 | 15.12 ± 2.71 | −1.94 | ≤0.001 * | −0.10 (−0.75; 0.54) T |
| Body skeletal muscle mass Lee (%) | 38.50 ± 4.47 | 38.45 ± 4.43 | −0.10 | 0.309 | 0.01 (−0.66; 0.64) T | 39.03 ± 1.78 | 39.46 ±1.75 | 1.10 | ≤0.001 * | 0.23 (−0.42; 0,88) S |
| Lean body mass (%) | 82.87 ± 3.57 | 82.79 ± 3.53 | −0.10 | 0.029 * | −0.02 (−0,67; 0.63) T | 84.58 ± 2.68 | 85.88 ± 2.71 | 1.53 | <0.001 * | 0.45 (−0.20; 1,12) S |
SD: standard deviation; BMI: body mass index; ES: effect size; CI: confidence interval; T: trivial; S: small * p < 0.05.
Figure 6Change in body mass and body mass index variables assessment for each group and assessment stage. * Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the EG (p < 0.05). # Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the CG (p < 0.05). EG: experimental group; CG: control group.
Figure 7Change in body composition variables assessment for each group and assessment stage. * Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the EG (p < 0.05). # Represents a statistically significant difference compared to the pre-test with the superiority of the CG (p < 0.05). EG: experimental group; CG: control group.