Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > Articles online first > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2020 Jul 28

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2020 Jul 28

DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.20.10882-X

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

A comparison of the effects of plyometric and virtual training on physical and functional performance: a randomized, controlled, clinical trial

Daniel F. LOBATO , Vitória A. TEIXEIRA, Isabelle FROES, Marina A. DONZELI, Dernival BERTONCELLO

Human Movement Analysis Laboratory, Applied Physical Therapy Department, Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Brazil


PDF


BACKGROUND: This study compared the effects of plyometric training (PT) and virtual training (VT) on physical and functional performance.
METHODS: Fifty-five moderately-trained women participated in this randomized, controlled, prospective study. The subjects were randomly assigned to VT (n=20), PT (n=18), and control (CG, n=17) groups. The VT was performed using the Your Body Shape Fitness Evolved 2012TM exergame in an Xbox360/KineticTM environment. The PT was based on the methods used in previous studies. Both interventions were performed 3 times per week for 8 weeks. Participants in the CG were not submitted to any type of intervention. Physical performance (fitness and athleticism levels) was assessed using the Nike+ Kinetic TrainingTM exergame in an Xbox360/KineticTM environment. Functional performance was assessed using the shuttle run (SR), triple hop test (THT), and six-meter timed hop test (STHT).
RESULTS: Post-intervention fitness and athleticism levels were significantly greater in VT (P < 0.001 and P = 0.009) and in PT (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003) than baselines values. Only VT post-intervention fitness level was significantly greater compared to CG (P = 0.03). Postintervention SR values were significantly lower than baselines values in all groups (P <0.001). VT (P = 0.08) and PT (P = 0.006) post-intervention values were significantly lower compared to CG. Post-intervention THT values were significantly greater than baselines values in VT and PT (P < 0.001). VT (P = 0.04 - dominant limb) and PT (P = 0.003 -dominant limb and P = 0.03 - non-dominant limb) post-intervention values were significantly greater compared to CG. Post-intervention STHT values were significantly lower than baselines values in VT (P < 0.001), PT (P < 0.001) and CG (P = 0.01-0.02). PT post-intervention dominant (P = 0.01) and non-dominant (P = 0.03) limb values were significantly lower compared to CG.
CONCLUSIONS: Both VT and PT are beneficial for improving physical and functional performance. Therefore, VT might be a new tool that can be used for physical exercise practice and conditioning training in moderately-trained women.


KEY WORDS: Functional performance; Plyometric; Virtual reality; Functional tests

top of page