Lower Limb Injuries
Conditions
Keywords
Equilibre, Force, Vitesse, Surface
Brief summary
Summary The purpose of this interventional study is to determine whether the type of training surface used during plyometric training influences neuromuscular performance, dynamic postural balance, and muscle soreness in young active males. The main questions this study aims to answer are: * Does plyometric training performed on sand improve dynamic postural balance more than training performed on a firm surface? * Does plyometric training performed on sand reduce lower-limb muscle soreness compared with training performed on a firm surface? Researchers will compare a firm-ground plyometric training group, a sand-surface plyometric training group, and a control group to evaluate the effects of training surfaces on physical performance and recovery. Participants will: * Perform plyometric training sessions three times per week for eight weeks (experimental groups). * Complete performance tests, including vertical jumps, sprint tests, change-of-direction speed tests, and the Y-Balance Test, before and after the intervention. * Report perceived lower-limb muscle soreness following training sessions.
Detailed description
Detailed Description This prospective randomised controlled study investigates the effects of plyometric training performed on two different training surfaces (firm ground vs sand) on neuromuscular performance, dynamic postural balance, and lower-limb muscle soreness in young active males. Participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups: a firm-ground plyometric training group, a sand-based plyometric training group, or a control group that continues regular activities without additional training. The intervention lasts eight weeks, with three supervised training sessions per week for the experimental groups. The plyometric training program includes multidirectional exercises, such as forward bounding jumps, lateral hurdle jumps, and forward hurdle jumps, with progressive increases in training volume throughout the intervention. Neuromuscular performance is evaluated using the standing long jump, squat jump, countermovement jump, sprint tests (10 m and 20 m), and a change-of-direction speed test (T-test). Dynamic postural balance is assessed using the Y-Balance Test for both dominant and non-dominant stance legs. Lower-limb muscle soreness is recorded after each training session using a 7-point Likert scale. Pre- and post-intervention assessments are conducted to determine the effects of training surfaces on performance outcomes, balance adaptations, and perceived muscle soreness.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALPlyometric Training on Sand
Participants performed a multidirectional plyometric training program on dry sand three times a week for eight weeks. The training sessions included forward bounding jumps, lateral hurdle jumps, and forward hurdle jumps with progressive increases in training volume throughout the intervention period.
Sponsors
University of Manouba
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Participants were randomly assigned to one of three parallel groups: a firm-ground plyometric training group, a sand-surface plyometric training group, or a control group. The two experimental groups performed identical plyometric training programs three times per week for eight weeks on different surfaces (firm ground or sand), while the control group maintained their usual activities without additional training. Performance outcomes were assessed before and after the intervention period.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
19 Years to 20 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Male university students aged between 19 and 20 years * Physically active and regularly participating in practical sport science activities * Free from lower-limb injuries during the previous six months * Provided written informed consent to participate in the study
Exclusion criteria
* Presence of any musculoskeletal injury affecting the lower limbs or lower back * Any neurological or balance disorder that could affect test performance * Participation in another structured strength or plyometric training program during the study period * Failure to complete the training intervention or testing sessions
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Squat Jump (SJ) height (cm) | Baseline and after the 8-week training intervention | Squat Jump height is measured in centimeters using the Optojump infrared optical measurement system. The mean of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Countermovement Jump (CMJ) height (cm) | Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks | The countermovement jump height was measured in centimetres using the Optojump infrared optical measurement system. The mean of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Standing Long Jump distance (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Standing long jump performance is measured as horizontal jump distance in centimetres. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in 10-meter sprint time (s) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Sprint performance was measured as the time in seconds to complete the 10-meter split using photoelectric timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in 20-meter sprint time (s) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Sprint performance was measured as the time in seconds to complete the 20-metre sprint using photoelectric timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in T-test time (s) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Change-of-direction speed is measured as the time in seconds it takes to complete the T-test using electronic timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test anterior reach distance on the dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal anterior reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test posteromedial reach distance on the dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal posteromedial reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test posterolateral reach distance on the dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal posterolateral reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test anterior reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance assessed as maximal anterior reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test posterolateral reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance was assessed as maximal posterolateral reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimetres. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Change in Y-Balance Test posteromedial reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm) | Baseline and after 8 weeks | Dynamic postural balance assessed as maximal posteromedial reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis. |
| Mean lower-limb muscle soreness score (7-point Likert scale) | After each training session over 8 weeks | Lower-limb muscle soreness was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale after each plyometric training session. The mean score across all training sessions will be used for analysis. |
Countries
Tunisia
Contacts
STUDY_DIRECTORMohamed UM jlid, Assoc. Prof.
University Manouba
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORSalah Mohammed Abuzaid
University Manouba
Outcome results
None listed