EXERCISE BIOMEDICINE - HUMAN PERFORMANCE 60

ECTS
MASTER THESIS

The efficacy of plyometric training on

explosive actions (sprinting, jumping, agility
and ball kicking) on the performance of
young soccer players.

Isaak Alexandros Koutsoklenis

Biomedicine with Exercise Physiology application, 30 credits

Halmstad 2016-03-10
 The efficacy of plyometric training on
explosive actions (sprinting, jumping,
agility and ball kicking) on the
performance of young soccer players.

Isaak Alexandros Koutsoklenis

2018 – 03 - 2

Master Thesis (30 credits) in Exercise Biomedicine – Human Performance

Halmstad University

School of Business, Engineering and Science

Thesis advisor: Ann Bremander, Department of Business, Engineering and Science

Thesis examiner: Emma Haglund, Department of Business, Engineering and Science

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor Ann Bremander for her valuable and
edifying assistance, suggestions, and advice for the completion of this review.

Abstract

Background: Plyometric training is a form of conditioning with increasing popularity

that involves the performance of body weight jumping type exercises with the use of
the stretch-shortening cycle muscle action. It is widely accepted that plyometric
training has beneficial effects on many sports, including soccer. Objectives: To
assess the effect of plyometric training on explosive actions of soccer performance
(sprinting, jumping, agility, ball kicking) and indicated the kind, the frequency and
targeted age groups on which the plyometrics should be executed. Methods: A search
for all types of trials was performed on Pubmed, Web of Science and Sport Discus
databases and the results were recorded according to PRISMA recommendations. 24
studies were included and judged for risk of bias and quality of evidence according to
Cochrane guidelines and GRADE. Results: The studies were judges to have “low”,
“high” and “unclear” risk of bias and were judged as “moderate”, “low” and very low
quality of evidence. The finding of most of the studies show that plyometric training
has beneficial effects and statistically significant improvements on the explosive
actions (sprinting, jumping, agility and ball kicking) of young soccer players between
10 and 19 years old. Conclusions: The level of evidence of the review is moderate
which means that further research is likely to have an important impact on our
confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. The current study
suggests that plyometric training can be beneficial for young soccer players when is
applied with gradual intensity, frequency of 2-3 times per week and along with
regular soccer and strength training. Future research of higher quality of evidence
studies and lower risk of bias should be performed in this field.
Key words: plyometric training, young soccer players, explosive actions
Table of contents

Background .................................................................................................................. 1
Objectives...................................................................................................................... 3
Methods ......................................................................................................................... 3
Criteria for considering studies for this review .................................................................3
Type of studies ...................................................................................................................3
Type of participants ............................................................................................................3
Type of interventions..........................................................................................................3
Ethical and social considerations ........................................................................................4
Type of outcome measures ...................................................................................................4
Primary outcomes ...............................................................................................................4
Search methods for identification of studies ......................................................................4
Search strategy ...................................................................................................................4
Data collection and analysis .................................................................................................4
Search results......................................................................................................................4
Study selection ...................................................................................................................5
Assessment of risk of bias in included studies ....................................................................6
Grading of evidence ..............................................................................................................7
Results ........................................................................................................................... 7
Description of studies ...........................................................................................................7
Result of the search ..............................................................................................................7
Included studies ..................................................................................................................23
Author and year of studies ...........................................................................................23
Methods ............................................................................................................................23
Participants .......................................................................................................................23
Interventions .....................................................................................................................23
Outcomes ..........................................................................................................................24
Main results – significant findings ...................................................................................24
Assessment of risk of bias within each study ...................................................................25
Quality assessment - GRADE ............................................................................................27
Discussion.................................................................................................................... 30
Summary of main results ...................................................................................................30
Quality of the evidence .......................................................................................................30
Potential biases of the review process ..............................................................................31
Agreements and disagreements with other studies or reviews .......................................31
Author’s conclusions.................................................................................................. 32
Implications for practice ....................................................................................................32
Implications for research ...................................................................................................33
Declaration of interest ............................................................................................... 33
References ................................................................................................................... 34
Background
Soccer is one of the most popular sports worldwide. Approximately 200 million
athletes of all ages, gender, and social status, both on amateur and professional level
play soccer in clubs around the world (Longo et al, 2012). The popularity of soccer
has inspired the sport science community to try and investigate and analyze the main
characteristics of the sport and the factors that can affect the performance of a soccer
player during the game. It is generally acknowledged that the parallel physical
capacities of both technical skills with the ball and physical fitness is the key for a
soccer player to achieve a successful performance in a soccer match (Little &
Williams, 2005). A great level of soccer performance needs the successful skillfulness
in abilities like the repeated explosive burst, strength, power, kicking, tackling, and
their derivatives such as jumping, turning, sprinting, and changing direction speed
(Ramirez et al, 2015).

Plyometric training is a form of conditioning with increasing popularity that involves

the performance of body weight jumping type exercises with the use of the stretch-
shortening cycle muscle action (Meylan and Malatesta, 2009). The stretch and
shortening cycle improves the capacity of the neural and musculotendinous systems to
produce the maximal amount of force in the shortest possible time, a fact that makes
plyometric training a combination of power and speed (Markovic and Mikulic, 2010)
According to Wang and Chang, 2016 plyometric training consists of dynamic and
rapid stretching of muscles (eccentric action) that is instantly followed by a concentric
of shortening action of the same muscles and connective tissues. The purpose of
plyometric training is to increase the power of subsequent movements using both
natural elastic components of muscle and tendon and the stretch reflex (Bedoya et al,
2015). The great advantage of plyometric training is that it uses the stored elastic
energy of the muscles, something that cannot be produced by a concentric contraction
alone (Wang and Chang, 2016). Plyometric training programmes typically include
explosive exercises such as bounding, hopping and drop jumping and the shortest
time of ground touch as it is followed by a rapid movement on the opposite vertical
side (Wang and Chang, 2016). This kind of plyometric exercises is shown that can be
beneficial for a variety of sports that require explosive actions like sprinting, jumping
and change of direction speed. More specifically, a variety of studies (Michailidis et
al 2013; Söhnlein, et al 2014; Loturco et al, 2015; Saez et al, 2015; De Hoyo et al,

1
2016) has shown plyometric training to be beneficial for the enhancement of
performance of young soccer players on aspects like jumping, sprinting, kicking and
agility. According to the studies of Behm et al, 2008 and Faigenbaum et al, 2009 the
plyometric training can be beneficial for youth populations, when is applied according
to particular guidelines in order to decrease the risk of injury. The benefits of
plyometric training in young athletes consist of increase in neuromuscular function
and enhanced bone density.

Systematic review

Systematic reviews seek to systematically search for, appraise and synthesize data
from original research on a topic area by using a methodologically transparent and
thus replicable process (Grant & Booth, 2009). It attempts to collate all empirical
evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific
research question (Oxman & Guyatt, 1993). This systematic review was conducted
according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
(http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/) and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines (Moher et al 2015).

An earlier systematic review of Bedoya et al, 2015 has studied the general
effectiveness of plyometric training on soccer performance of young players. Except
for the aforementioned review there are no other reviews in the scientific society that
have dealt with these specific effects of plyometric training. This study adds the
different fact that contributes to exactly these four specific aspects of soccer
performance. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to investigate the
efficacy of plyometric training on sprinting, jumping, ball kicking and agility in
particular on soccer players under 20 years old and show in which way the plyometric
exercises can be applicable and beneficial for the young soccer players. This study
adds the different fact that contributes to exactly these four specific aspects of
performance.

2
Objectives
The main purpose of this systematic review is to access the efficacy of plyometric
training on several explosive actions such as sprinting, ball kicking and agility on the
performance of young soccer players.

The research questions based on the above purpose are the following:
1. Does plyometric training as a part of the soccer training has positive effect on
the performance of young soccer players on particular explosive actions such
as sprinting, jumping, ball kicking and agility?
2. What kind of exercises of plyometric training, in which frequency and
intensity, and in which specific age groups should plyometric exercises be
used in the soccer training in order to have a positive effect on the
performance of young soccer players?

Methods
Criteria for considering studies for this review
Type of studies
The type of studies that were included in this review were the Randomized control
trials (RCT), the Experimental studies with control group (EC), Experimental studies
with one group only (E). Grey literature was excluded from the review. According to
the definition of Schopfel et al, 2011, “Grey literature stands for manifold document
types produced on all levels of government, academics, business and industry in print
and electronic formats that are protected by intellectual property rights, of sufficient
quality to be collected and preserved by library holdings or institutional repositories,
but not controlled by commercial publishers i.e., where publishing is not the primary
activity of the producing body.”
Type of participants
Young and healthy, male and female soccer players under 20 years old that play on
soccer clubs of either amateur or professional level were the type of participants that
participated in the eligible studies that were included in this review.
Type of interventions
Studies that investigated the effects of plyometric training in explosive actions such as
sprinting, jumping, kicking speed and agility on the performance of soccer players

3
were included. The period of intervention (plyometric training) had to be at least one
week. The studies had to have more than one participant necessarily under the age of
20. Case studies that were excluded from this review.

Ethical considerations
Due to the nature of systematic reviews ethical heterogeneity among studies may exist
and therefore for some studies included in systematic reviews, ethical considerations
could be of insufficient quality (Vergnes et al, 2010). Following the recommendation
by Weingarten et al (2004) only studies with a clearly stated ethical approval were
included in the present review. Therefore, all the studies were additionally screened
on the criterion of the ethical approval.

Type of outcome measures

Primary outcomes
Sprinting, jumping, agility and kicking speed as measured by validate specific tests on
its aspect of performance.

Search methods for identification of studies

Search Strategy
To identify articles for the review, the PubMed, Web of Science and the
SPORTDiscus databases were searched. A time frame from January 2000 to August
2017 was applied for the search to focus on state-of-the-art research. Relevant
controlled vocabulary terms and key terms related to the topic of the dissertation were
used for the search. More specifically the following words were used as key-terms to
conduct the literature search: plyometric training, plyometrics, soccer, soccer players.
To conduct the keyword, search the following Boolean search string was compiled
and applied: (“plyometric training” OR “plyometrics”) AND (“soccer” OR “soccer
players”) for studies published from 01/01/2000 to 6/08/2017. The search was
performed on 6 August 2017 by the author.

4
Data collection and analysis
Search results
The search yielded several relevant studies. Precise number for each database are
presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Quantification of search results according to each database.

Database Retrieved Included
SPORTDiscus 165 10
PubMed 97 11
Web of Science 172 3

Study Selection
Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to better match the review with
our research questions to be answered. Inclusion and exclusion criteria is presented in
detail in Table 2.

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the review

Inclusion
criteria
Topic The efficacy of plyometric training on explosive actions on the
performance of young soccer players
Types of Research comparing the effects of plyometric training on explosive
intervention actions, i.e. sprinting, jumping, kicking speed and agility
Population Soccer players, male and female, under 20 years old, amateurs and
professionals, healthy athletes.
Language English
Study types Randomized control trials, Experimental studies with control
group, Experimental studies with one group only
Publication Peer reviewed academic journal articles
type
Ethical Studies with a clearly declared ethics approval
approval

5
 Time frame 2000-2017

Exclusion
criteria
Types of Studies examining the efficacy of plyometric training on other
intervention soccer actions (e.g. strength)
Population Athletes over 20 years old, injured athletes, athletes with mental
health issues
Study types Grey literature
Publication Edited books, editorials, dissertations, commentaries, narrative
type reviews, newspaper/nonacademic sources, bulletins, conference
abstracts/papers, popular culture

Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

The recommendations and guidelines of the Cochrane handbook for systematic
reviews (Higgins and Green, 2011) were used to assess the quality of the
methodological approach that was followed in each of the included studies. The risk
of bias was assessed after the consideration of the design and conduction of the
studies of each study separately. The approach provided in the Cochrane guidelines
(Higgins et al, 2011) was followed to define the risk of bias summary assessments
(high risk, unclear risk and low risk of bias) for each one of the included studies. The
sources of risk of bias that were assessed in each study are the following:
 Selection bias
(Random sequence generation and Allocation concealment)
 Performance bias
(Blinding of participants and personnel)
 Detection bias
(Blinding of outcome assessment)
 Attrition bias
(Incomplete outcome data)
 Reporting bias
(Selective reporting)

6
  Other bias

Grading of Evidence
The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and
Evaluation) system which is adopted by the Cochrane Collaboration in order to rate
the quality of the body of scientific evidence in the systematic review (Schünemann et
al, 2008). The GRADE approach specifies four levels of quality. The four levels of
quality consist of high, moderate, low and very low. Randomised trials have the
highest quality ratings and observational studies are considered to have low ratings.
For the purpose of this systematic review, the randomised studies were allocated the
high rating and the experimental studies the low. After the upgrading and degrading
the randomised trials can be degraded to maximum 3 levels and the experimental
studies can be upgraded to high and moderate levels.

Results
Description of studies
Result of the search
The total number of articles that were found initially through electronic searches was
434. After the removal of 15 duplicates, 419 studies remained. At this point, abstracts
were read for 419 studies that had a potential to be deemed as relevant and 364
articles were excluded due to their title. 55 articles were read in full and assessed for
eligibility by the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the review (population, language,
study types, publication type, ethical approval, and time frame) and 31 articles were
excluded. 24 was the final number of articles that selected and considered eligible for
the review. The flow chart of the selection of articles is shown in Figure 1.

7
 Records identified Additional records identified
through database through other sources / No other
searching. sources were used.
(n = 434) (n = 0)

Records after duplicates removed

(n = 419)
(n = 0)

Records screened (Abstracts read) Records excluded

(n = 419) (n = 364)

Full-text articles assessed for Full-text articles

eligibility excluded, with reasons
(n = 55) (n = 31)

Studies included in the review

(n= 24)

Figure 1. Flowchart showing the selection process for the articles included in the
systematic review.

Concerning the efficacy of plyometric training on each explosive action of young

soccer players separately, it was found that out of the total 24 studies the 22 of them
were dealing with jumping, 23 sprinting, 9 ball kicking and 19 with agility. The total

8
number of subjects that took part in the studies that were included in the review was
877.

9
Table 3. Description of all included studies.

Author Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
& Year
Μeylan Experimental Soccer TG performed various Tests: ΤG: Beneficial impact on linear High
and with one players. Total: plyometric drills for 20 to 25 - linear sprint test, sprint training (-2.1%, p =
Malatesta intervention 25 minutes as a substitute for some - agility test 0.004), agility (-9.6%, p<0.001)
(2009) group and one ΤG: n= 14 soccer drills within the usual 90- - countermovement jump and countermovement jump
control group. CG: n=11 minute practice twice per (7,9%, p<0.004).
Age: 13.2 ± week. Plyometric drills included
Length: 8 weeks 0.6 years. multiple jumps (ankle hop, CG: No significant changes.
vertical and lateral hurdle jump),
horizontal and lateral
bounding, skipping, and footwork
(speed ladder).
CG: Regular soccer training only

Rubley et Group-assigned, Soccer PTG: various types Tests: PTG: Significant increases of High
al, (2011) mixed-model players. Total: of jumps, hops, skips, footwork, -Vertical jump test performance in kicking distance
experimental n=16 and sprint drills. -Kicking distance test and vertical jump distance after
design with one PTG: n=10 First 6 weeks: single-leg forward 14 weeks (p<0.001. Significant
intervention CG: n=6 hops over 6-inch increase in vertical jump after 14
group and one Age: 13.4 ± cones, double-leg hops over 10- weeks (p<0.014).
control group. 0.5 years inch hurdles, lateral hops over
10-inch hurdles, and lateral CG: No significant changes.
Length: 14 shuffles over a 12-inch box.
weeks. Final 6 weeks: 10-inch box jump-
ups,
10-inch depth jumps, and cutting
drills.
CG: Regular soccer training only

10
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Michailidis et al, RCT Soccer players. PTG: The first PT phase or Tests: PTG: Significant (p<0.05) Unclear
(2013) Τotal: n=45 macrocycle (6 weeks) consisted - linear sprint test beneficial changes in sprinting
Length: 12 PTG: n=24 of single and double-leg forward - leg muscle power test (3 -5%,) and jumping
weeks CG: n=21 hops over hurdles, lateral hops - standing long jump test performance (16-23%) leg
over hurdles, and lateral shuffles - leg strength test strength (28%), agility (23%)
Age:10.6 ± 0.5 over a box, skipping, and - anaerobic power test and kicking distance (22.5%.
years footwork. The second PT - agility test Anaerobic power remained
macrocycle (6 weeks) consisted - kicking distance test unaffected in both groups.
of footwork, skipping, single-
and double-leg box jumps and CG. No significant changes.
relatively low-intensity depth
jumps.
CG: Regular soccer training only

Ramírez- RCT Soccer players. TG: Plyometric drills including 2 Tests: TG: Plyometric training Low
Campillo et al, Total: n=76 sets of 10 repetitions of drop - linear sprint test induced significant (p<0.05)
(2014) TG: n=38 jumps from 20, 40, and 60 cm - agility test improvements in
Length: 7 CG: n=38 (i.e., 60 - countermovement countermovement jump
weeks Age: 13.2 ± 1.8 contacts) performed on a grass jump test (4.3%), drop jump (16%) and
years soccer field. - drop jump agility (-3.5%)m maximal
CG: Regular soccer training only - maximal kicking test for kicking distance (14%) and had
distance nonsignificant effect on
- 2.4-km time sprinting.
trial test
CG. No significant changes.

11
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Cavaco et al, RCT Soccer players. The subjects of the GCT1 and Τests: GCT1, GCT2: No significant Uclear
(2014) Total: n=16 GCT2 performed their normal - Maximum strength differences with control group
GCT1: n=5 soccer training along with - linear sprint test except for shooting
Length: 6 GCT2: n=5 the CTX program (1 session per - crossing efficiency test effectiveness, p=0.02).
weeks CG: n=6 week for the GTC1 and 2 sessions - agility test
Age: 13.80±0.84 per week for the GCT2). The CG - shooting test CG: No significant changes.
group performed only regular
soccer training. All groups
performed similar soccer training.
CG: Regular soccer training only.

Söhnlein et al, Experimental Soccer players. PTG: During every vertical Tests: PTG: Significant High
(2014) study design Τotal: n=22 horizontal PT session, the - linear sprint test improvements (p<0.05) in
with one PTG: n=12 following jumps were performed: - agility test sprinting (-3.2%, agility (-
intervention Age: 12.3 0.8 2-footed ankle hop forward, hurdle - shuttle run test 6.1%) and long jump
and one years jumps (with height - standing long jump test performance (+7.3%).
control CG: n=10 increasing during the 16 weeks),
group. Age: 13.0 ± 0.9 single leg hop forward, and CG: No significant changes.
squat jump. During every lateral
PT session, the following
Length: 16 jumps were performed: lateral
weeks. bound stabilization, lateral hurdle
jumps, double leg zigzag, and
single leg hop lateral.
CG: Regular soccer training only.

12
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Ramírez- RCT Soccer players. PPT: Plyometric training with Tests: PPT and NPPT: Significant Low
Campillo et al, Total: n=24 Age: progressive increase in volume - countermovement jump (p<0.001) changes in sprinting
(2015) Length: 6 13.0 ±2.3 across time. (horizontal, vertical tests (-1.1%), drop jumping (21.2%)
weeks and bilateral and unilateral) - drop jump tests and agility (-9.0%).
PPT: n=8 NPPT: no progressive increase - maximal kicking velocity
in volume - linear sprint test CG: No significant changes.
NPPT: n=8 CG: Regular soccer training - agility test
only. - endurance test
CG: n=8

Ramírez- RCT Soccer players. BG: Βilateral horizontal and Tests: BG, UG, B+UG: significant Unclear
Campillo et al, Total: n=54 vertical jumping exercises - countermovement jump test changes, in maximal kicking
(2015) Length: 6 CG: n=14 UG: Vertical and horizontal - drop jump test velocity (p <0.05), sprinting
weeks BG: n=12 jumping exercises on both right - maximal kicking velocity, (p<0.01)
UG: n=16 and left leg - linear sprint test and agility (p<0.001) in all
B + UG: n=12 B + UG: Bilateral and unilateral - agility test, groups
Age: 11.4 ± 2.2 vertical and horizontal jumping - endurance test
years exercises on both legs. - balance performance test CG: No significant changes.
CG: Regular soccer training
only.

13
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Ramírez- RCT Soccer players. VG: vertical unilateral and Tests: VHG: Significant changes Unclear
Campillo et al, Total: n=40 bilateral plyometric exercises - countermovement jump (p≤0.05) in jumping (5%),
(2015) Length: 6 VG: n=10 HG: horizontal unilateral and tests sprinting (6%), agility (-5.1%)
weeks HG: n=10 bilateral plyometric exercises - drop jump test and maximal kicking velocity
VHG: n=10 VHG: vertical and horizontal - reactive strength index (15.5%).
CG: n=10 unilateral and bilateral - maximal kicking velocity VG, HG: No significant
plyometric exercises - linear sprint test changes.
CG: Regular soccer training - agility test CG: No significant changes.
only. - endurance test
- balance test.

Michailidis RCT Soccer players. JG: Jumping (one and two leg) Τests: JG: Significant (p < 0.05) Unclear
(2015) Total: n=21 and running (skipping) exercises. - linear sprint test changes in jumping
Length: 10 CG: Regular soccer training (p<0.031and sprinting 7.2%,
weeks. JG: n= 11 only. - standing long jump. p<0.001)
CG: n=10
Age: 11.4± 0.6 CG: No significant changes.

14
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Sáez de RCT Soccer players. CombG: soccer training program Tests: CombG: Significant changes Unclear
Villarreal et al, Total: n=26 + plyometric + - linear sprint test (p<0.05) in vertical jump size,
(2015) Lenth: 9 CombG: n=13 sprint + dribbling + shooting - agility test sprint, agility and kicking
weeks. CG: n=13 training. short-term (low - countermovement test speed.
Age: Βetween 14 volume) and moderate-intensity - vertical jump test
and 15 years. sessions (low-impact training - endurance test CG: No significant changes.
program). - ball-shooting speed test
CG: Regular soccer training
only.

Blanco et al, Quasi- Soccer players. STG: Resistance Tests: STG: Significant (p<0.05) High
(2015) experimental Total: n=38 training program combined with - linear sprint test improvement in
design STG: n=20 plyometrics - countermovement jump countermovement jump,
CG: n=18 plus a soccer training program. - one-repetition maximum vertical jump and sprinting.
Length: 6 Age: 14.7 ± 0.5 Strength training consisted of test
weeks full CG: No significant changes.
squats with low load (45–60 %
1RM) and low volume (2–3 sets
and 4–8 repetitions per set)
combined with jumps and sprints
twice a week
CG: Regular soccer training
only.

15
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Ramirez- RCT Soccer players. The PT groups performed Tests: PT24, PT48: Significant Low
Campillo et al, Total: n=166 plyometric drills as a substitute - squat jump test improvements (p<0.001,
(2015) Length: 6 PT24: n=54 for some soccer drills within - countermovement jump test p<0.05) in jumping (12.2%),
weeks PT48: n=57 the usual 120-minute practice - drop jump test sprinting (-5.6%) and agility (-
CG: n=55 twice per week for 6 weeks. - long jump test, 2.7%).
Αge: Βetween 10- PT24 and PT48 completed the - linear sprint test
17 years. same - agility test CG: No significant changes.
number of total jumps during - shuttle run test,
intervention. Half of the - sit-and-reach test
plyometric volume corresponds
to cyclic
and the other half to acyclic
jumps.
Loturco et al, RCT Soccer players. Total of 11 jump training (VJ or Tests: VJG, HJG: Significant Low
(2015) Total: n=24 HJ) sessions were performed by - Countermovement jumps improvements (p<0.05) in
Length: 3 VJG: n = 12 each group, lasting between 18 (CMJ) jumping and sprinting.
weeks HJG: n = 12 and 27 min each. The shape of - Horizontal jumps (HJ)
Age: 18.3 ± 0.7 the overloading was pyramidal - Sprinting speed 5-10-20 m
years in the first 10 training sessions, CG: No significant changes.
divided in blocks of 2 training
sessions. The VJ consisted of
countermovement jumps (CMJ)
with the hands on the hips, while
the HJ were performed with
arms swinging.

16
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Kobal et al, RCT Soccer players. CP: Strength training (ST) Tests: CP, TD, CT: Νο significant High
(2016) Total: n=27 before plyometric training (PT). - countermovement jumps increases in jumping, sprinting
Length: 8 CP: n=9 TD: PΤ before ST. - agility test and agility (p>0.05)
weeks TD: n=9 CT: ST and PT performed - linear sprint test
CT: n=9 alternately, set by set. - Half-Squat Maximum
Age: 18.9 ± 0.6 The ST composed of half-squat - Dynamic Strength
years exercises performed at
60–80% of 1 repetition
maximum (1RM); the PT
composed of
drop jump exercises executed in
a range from 30 to 45 cm.
Granacher et al, Experimental Soccer players. 30–35-min plyometric training Tests: SPT, ITP: Significant Unclear
(2016) study with Total: n=24 regime incorporating multiple - jump performance test differences in jumping
two SPT: n=12 sets of CMJs, DJs and hurdle - countermovement jump test (p<0.001), sprinting (p<0.05)
intervention IPT: n=12 CMJs. - drop jump test and agility (p<0.001) between
groups. Participants of the - linear sprint test groups
Age: 15 ±1 years SPT group performed all jump - agility test
Length: exercises on stable surfaces and - balance test
subjects in the IPT group
executed the same exercises on
highly unstable surfaces that are
frequently used during
athletic training and
rehabilitation.

17
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
Νegra et al, RCT Soccer players. E: Plyometric training program Tests: E: Significant (p<0.05) gains in Unclear
(2016) Total: n=28 consisting of hurdle and drop - agility tests jumping, sprinting and agility
Length: 8 E: n=15 jumps. - linear sprint tests tests.
weeks CG: n=13 CG: Regular soccer training
Αge: 15.7 ± 0.2 only. CG: No significant changes.
years.

Negra et al, RCT Soccer players. RTG: low-to-moderate training Tests: RTP, PTG: Significant Unclear
(2016) Total: n=34 load (40%-60% of 1RM) - muscle strength test improvements (p<0.005) in
Length: 12 RTG: n=12 was adjusted and increased over - jump ability test both groups in sprinting
weeks PTG: n=11 the course of the training. - linear sprint test (4.3%), jumping (7%) and
CG: n=11 PT: vertical-horizontal - agility test agility (3.8%).
leap sessions (2-footed ankle
Age = 12.8 ± 0.2 hop forward, hurdle jumps, and CG: No significant changes.
squat jump) and lateral jumping
sessions (lateral
bound stabilization, lateral
hurdle jumps, and double-leg
zigzag).
CG: Regular soccer training
only.

18
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year
De Hoyo et al, Experimental Soccer players. Full-back squatting training Τests: SQ: Improvements in jumping High
(2016) study: 3 Total: n=32. protocol: 2–3 sets, 4–8 - countermovement jump test and sprinting (p<0.05), no
intervention SQ: n=11, RS: repetitions at 40–60% 1 - linear sprint test improvements in agility.
groups n=12 repetition maximum. - agility test
PLYO: n=9 Resisted sprint training: 6–10
Length: 8 sets x 20-m loaded sprints
weeks Age: 18 ± 1 (12.6% of BM).
Plyometric and specific drills
training: 1–3 sets, 2–3
repetitions of 8 plyometric and
speed/agility
exercises.
Negra et al, RCT Soccer players. The first plyometric training Tests: SPT, UPT: No Significant Unclear
(2017) Total: n=34 session of each training week - jumping ability test differences (p>0.05) in both
Length: 8 SPT= 18 focused on - standing long jump test groups.
weeks UPT= 16 improving the vertical leap, - linear sprint test
Αge = 12.7 ± 0.2 whereas the second plyometric - agility
years training session focused on - balance test
improving the horizontal
jumping ability.
Participants of the SPT group
performed all jump exercises on
stable surfaces and subjects in
the UPT
group executed the same
exercises on highly unstable
surfaces.

19
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year

Chaabène and Quasi Soccer The two experimental groups participated in an Tests: LPT, HPT: significant High
Negra (2017) experimental players. 8-weeks in-seasonPT program with 2 training - Linear sprint test effects on sprinting
study with Total: n=25 sessions per-week. Both groups conducted five - agility (p=0.05), agility (p=0.02),
two LPT: n=13 soccer training sessions per-week and two - vertical jump test horizontal (p=0.07) and
intervention years plyometric training sessions were integrated - counter-movement vertical jump ability
groups. HPT: n=12 into the regular soccer training routine every jump test (p=0.08) on both groups.
Age = 12.70± first PT session in each week was focused on - horizontal standing-
Length: 8 0.25 years improving the vertical leap (i.e., CMJs), long-jump test
weeks whereas every
second PT session was focused on improving
the horizontal jumping ability (i.e., two-footed
ankle hop forward). Players were instructed to
perform at maximal intensity.
Thomas et al, Randomized, Soccer CMJ group performed exercises that always Τests: DJ, CMJ: Improvements in Unclear
(2017) between- players. began with a countermovement, defined as a vertical jump height (p <
group design Total: n=12 flexion of the knees. During rebound exercises, - countermovement 0.05) and agility time (p <
experimental participants vertical jump test 0.05) and no change in
study with DJ: n=7 in this group were told to ‘‘damp’’ their sprint performance (p
two landings each time and - linear sprint speed >0.05). No difference
intervention CMJ: n=5 to gain maximum height through knee flexion. (0>0.05) between groups.
groups. Participants in the DJ group performed - agility test
Age = 17.3 ± exercises that always began with a drop from a
Length: 6 0.4 years height (40 cm). Participants in the DJ group
weeks were instructed to minimize ground-contact
time while maximizing height.

20
Author & Methods Participants Interventions Outcome measures Main results Risk of bias
Year

Chaouachi et RCT Soccer ABPT group: alternated Tests: ABPT, BBPT: Significant Unclear
al, (2017) players. balance exercises prior to plyometric exercises - strength test (p<0.001) improvements in
Length: 8 Total: n=26 in pairs. - power test jumping (20%), sprinting
weeks ABPT: n=13 - agility test ((-4%) and agility (-8%) on
BBPT: n=13 BBPT group: blocks of - linear sprint, both groups.
Age: 13.9 ± balance exercises prior to plyometric exercises. - balance test
0.3 years. - isometric back and knee
extension strength,
- standing long jump test
- Y-balance test

Chtara et al, RCT Soccer PLYO training = 9 Tests: PLYO, AG, RS: Significant Unclear
(2017) players. lower limb exercises (2-3 sets of 8-12 - horizontal jump tests pre to post trainings effects
Length: 6 Total: n=42 repetitions). - linear sprint test (p<0.05 and p<0.01) on all
weeks PLYO: n=10 The AG group performed planned AG drills - agility test groups in sprinting (4%),
AG: n=10 and direction - repeated sprint ability jumping (7.9%) and
RS: =10 changes. test agility(4.02%).
CG: n=12 RS training consisted of 2-4 sets of 5-6x 20 to
Age: 30 m shuttle sprints (20 seconds recovery in CG: No significant
13.6±0.3- between). changes.
years. CG: regular soccer training.

21
TG= training group, PTG=plyometric training group, RCT= randomized controlled trial, SQ = back squat group, RS = resisted sprint group;
PLYO = plyometric and speed/agility group, BM=Body Mass, COD=change of direction, JG= Jumping Group, CG= Control Group,
PPT=progressive plyometric training, NPPT=non progressive plyometric training, BG = Bilateral plyometric training group, UG = unilateral
plyometric training group; B + UG = combined bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group, CombG= combined group, PT24= plyometric
training groups with 24 hours of rest, PT48= Plyometric training groups with 48 hours of rest, VG=vertical plyometric group, HG=horizontal
plyometric group, VHG=vertical and horizontal group, RTG= resistance training group RT=resistance training, PT=plyometric training,
RCOD=repeated change-of-direction test, STG=strength training group CP=complex training, TD=traditional training, CT=contrast training,
SPT= stability plyometric training surfaces, IPT= instability plyometric training, PTG=plyometric training group, GCT1= a group that
performed one weekly CXT, GCT2= session group that performed two weekly CXT sessions, CONT=a control group that did not perform CTX,
PLYO=plyometrics, AG=agility, RS=repeated sprint, LPT=low-volume plyometric training group, HPT=High-volume plyometric training
group, IPT=plyometrics on unstable surfaces, VJG=vertical jumping group, HJG=horizontal jumping group, ABPT=individual balance and
plyometric exercises, BBPT= block of balance exercises prior to a block of plyometric exercises.

22
Included studies

Author and year of studies

Twenty-four studies were included dated from 2009 to 2017. Eighteen studies (75%)
were published after 2015.

Methods

The included studies in this review had different types of design. Sixteen studies were
randomized control trials (Michailidis et al, 2013; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2014;
Cavaco et al, 2014; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015;
Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Michailidis et al, 2015; Saez de Villareal et al, 2015;
Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Loturco et al, 2015; Kobal et al, 2016; Negra et al,
2016; Negra et al, 2016; Negra et al, 2016; Chaouachi et al, 2017; Chtara et al, 2017)
all of which had a control group except for the studies of Loturco et al, 2015 and
Kobal et al, 2016 which had two and three intervention groups only respectively.
Fours studies (Meylan & Malatesta, 2009; Rubley et al 2011; Söhnlein et al, 2014 and
Blanco et al, 2015) were of experimental design with both intervention and control
groups while the other four studies (Granacher et al, 2016; De Hoyo et al, 2016;
Chaabene & Negra 2016 and Τhomas et al, 2017) only had intervention groups. The
control groups in all studies performed only their regular soccer training.

Participants

The total number of participants that took part in the studies was 877. The number of
participants that participated on each study ranged from 12 to 166 with a range of
mean age from 10 to 19 years. Between one and four groups were used in the studies
and the number of participants ranged in each group from 6 to 57.

Interventions

Studies with control group

Sixteen studies (Meylan & Malatesta, 2009; Rubley et al, 2011; Michailidis et al,
2013; Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2014; Söhnlein et al, 2014; Ramírez-Campillo et al,
2015; Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2015; Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2015; Michailidis 2015;
Sáez de Villarreal et al, 2015; Blanco et al, 2015; Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2015;
Kobal et al, 2016; Negra et al, 2016; Negra et al 2016; Chtara et al, 2017) used a

23
variety of plyometric drills as intervention on the intervention groups while the
control groups performed only their regular soccer training. The variety of
plyometrics included the following exercises: multiple jumps (ankle hop, vertical and
lateral hurdle jump), horizontal and lateral bounding, skipping, and footwork (speed
ladder), single-leg forward hops over 6-inch cones, double-leg hops over 10-inch
hurdles, lateral hops over 10-inch hurdles, and lateral shuffles over a 12-inch box, 10-
inch box jump-ups, 10-inch depth jumps, and cutting drills.

Studies with no control groups

Eight studies (Cavaco et al, 2014; Loturco et al, 2015; De Ηoyo et al, 2016; Chaabene
& Negra, 2016; Granacher et al, 2016; Νegra et al, 2017; Negra et al, 2017; Τhomas
et al, 2017; Chaouachi et al, 2017) used only intervention groups, which had different
plyometric drills as interventions or combination of plyometrics with strength
training.

Outcomes

The participants in all studies were trained in plyometric training and used valid and
reliable tests for running, jumping ability, kicking speed and agility.

Main results – significant findings

Out of the total number of 24 studies of the review, 18 studies (Meylan & Malatesta
2009; Michailidis et al 2013; Söhnlein et al 2014; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Ramirez-
Campillo 2015; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Michailidis et al 2015; Saez de Villareal et
al 2015; Βlanco et al 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al 2015; Loturco et al 2015;
Granacher et al 2016; Negra et al 2016; Negra et al 2016; Hoyo et al 2016; Chaabene
& Negra 2017; Chaouachi et al 2017; Chtara et al 2017) showed significant (p<0.05)
improvement that plyometric training had on sprinting ability of young soccer players.
20 studies (Meylan & Malatesta 2009; Rubley et al 2011; Ramirez-Campillo et al
2014; Söhnlein et al 2014; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Ramirez-Campillo 2015;
Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Michailidis et al 2015; Saez de Villareal et al 2015; Βlanco
et al 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al 2015; Loturco et al 2015; Granacher et al 2016;
Negra et al 2016; Negra et al 2016; Hoyo et al 2016; Negra et al 2017; Chaabene &
Negra 2017; Chaouachi et al 2017; Thomas et al 2017; Chtara et al 2017) showed
significant (p<0.05) improvement that plyometric training had on jumping ability of

24
young soccer players, 14 studies (Meylan & Malatesta 2009; Ramirez-Campillo et al
2014; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Ramirez-Campillo 2015;
Saez de Villareal et al 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al 2015; Granacher et al 2016;
Negra et al 2016; Negra et al 201; Chaabene & Negra 2017; Chaouachi et al 2017;
Thomas et al 2017; Chtara et al 2017) ) showed significant (p<0.05) improvement that
plyometric training had on agility and 5 studies (Rubley et al 2011; ; Ramirez-
Campillo et al 2014; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Ramirez-Campillo 2015; Saez de
Villareal et al 2016) showed improvement on ball kicking ability. However, the
studies of Cavaco et al (2014), Kobal et al (2016), Negra et al (2017) and Thomas et
al (2017) did not show any significant positive (p>0.05) in sprinting ability. On the
study of Kobal et al (2016) there was no significant positive effect (p>0.05) on
jumping ability and on 4 studies (Cavaco et al, 2014, Kobal et al 2016, De Hoyo et al
2016 and Negra et al, 2017) there was no significant positive effect on agility.

Assessment of risk of bias within each study

Out of 24 studies, 7 studies (Meylan and Malatesta, 2009; Rubley et al, 2011;
Söhnlein et al, 2014; Blanco et al, 2015; Kobal et al, 2016; Hoyo et al 2016; Chaabène
and Negra 2017) were judged as of high risk of bias studies. 4 studies (Ramirez and
Campillo et al, 2014; Ramirez and Campillo et al, 2015; Ramirez and Campillo et al,
2015; Loturco et al, 2015) were judged as low risk of bias studies and the rest 13
studies ( Michailidis et al, 2013; Cavaco et al, 2014; Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2015;
Ramírez-Campillo et al, 2015; Michailidis 2015; Sáez de Villarreal et al, 2015;
Granacher et al, 2016; Negra et al 2016; Negra et al 2016; Negra et al, 2017; Thomas
et al, 2017; Chaouachi et al, 2017; Chtara et al, 2017) were judges as unclear risk of
bias studies.

25
 Selective reporting (reporting bias)
Incomplete outcome data (attrition
Allocation concealment (Selection

Blinding of outcome assessment

Random sequence generation

personnel (performance bias)

Blinding of participants and

(detection bias)
(selection bias)

Other bias
bias)

Μeylan and Malatesta (2009)
Rubley et al (2011)
Michailidis et al, (2013)
Ramírez-Campillo et al, (2014)
Cavaco et al, (2014)
Söhnlein et al, (2014)
Ramírez-Campillo et al, (2015)
Ramírez-Campillo et al, (2015)
Ramírez-Campillo et al, (2015)
bias)
- - ? ? ? + +
- - ? ? - + +
? ? ? ? ? + +
+ + ? ? ? + +
? ? ? ? ? + +
- - ? ? - + +
+ + ? ? ? + +
? ? ? ? ? + +
? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Michailidis (2015) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Sáez de Villarreal et al, (2015) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Blanco et al, (2015) - - ? ? - + +
Ramirez-Campillo et al, (2015) + + ? ? ? + +
Loturco et al, (2015) + + ? ? ? + +
Kobal et al, (2016) - - ? ? ? + +
Granacher et al, (2016) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Νegra et al, (2016) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Negra et al, (2016) ? ? ? ? ? + +
De Hoyo et al, (2016) ? ? ? ? - + +
Negra et al, (2017) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Chaabène and Negra (2017) - - ? ? ? + +
Thomas et al, (2017) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Chaouachi et al, (2017) ? ? ? ? ? + +
Chtara et al, (2017) ? ? ? ? ? + +

+ Low risk of bias ? Unclear risk of bias - High risk of bias

Figure 2. Risk of bias on all studies.

26
Quality assessment – GRADE

Level of evidence

Among the total number of studies there were 16 RCT (Michailidis 2013; Ramirez-
Campillo et al, 2014; Cavaco et al, 2014; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Ramirez-
Campillo et al, 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Michailidis 2015; Saez de
Villareal et al, 2015; Ramirez-Campillo et al, 2015; Loturco et al, 2015; Kobal et al,
2015; Negra et al, 2016; Negra et al, 2016; Negra et al, 2017; Chaouachi et al, 2017;
Chtara et al, 2017) one RT (Thomas et al, 2017) and 5 EC (Meylan and Malatesta,
2009; Rubley et al, 2011; Sohnlein et al, 2015; Blanco et al, 2015; Chaabene and
Negra, 2017) and 2 E (Granacher et al, 2016; Hoyo et al, 2016).

4 RCT started at the high level and were downgraded one level for imprecision of
results and were upgraded one level for large effect, so they remained at high level. 13
RCT/RT studies started at the high level and were downgraded to low level because
of limitations in design and imprecision of results and EC/E studies started at low
level and downgraded to very low level because of limitations in design (Table 4 and
5).

27
Table 4. Level of evidence
No. of Design Limitations in Indirectness Unexplained Imprecision Publication Large Confounders Dose-
studies (strength design of evidence heterogeneity or of results bias effect response
(subjects) of inconsistency of
evidence) results
0
4 RCT RCT 0 0 -11 0 0 0 0
(289) (4)
“moderate
level”
13 RCT/RT -13 0 0 -11 0 0 0 0
RCT/RT (4)
“Low
level”
7 EC/E EC/ E -13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
“very low (2)
level”
RCT=Randomized control trials RT= Randomized trials EC= Experimental and control group E=Experimental group only
1
low number of included subjects
2
Large p-value<0.5
3
Lack of allocation concealment, blinding and other bias

28
Table 5. Summary of findings
Design no. of subjects Strength min - max p-value1 Evidence according to Comments
(no. of students) change when GRADE
compared to baseline
or control
4 RCT RCT +13 to +42% p<0.001 Moderate level - Limitation in
imprecision of results
(289) (4 studies included for
calculation)

13 RCT/RT RCT/RT -7 to + 28% p<0.01 Low level - Limitation in design

(460) (13 studies for

calculation)

7 EC/E EC/E +3 to 27% P<0.05 Very low level - Limitation in design

(128

RCT=Randomized control trials RT= Randomized trials EC= Experimental and control group E=Experimental group only
1:
Highest p-value for included studies

29
Discussion

Summary of main results

The main results of the current systematic review which included 24 studies provides
evidence that plyometric training has a beneficial effect on the performance of young
soccer players on explosive actions such as sprinting, jumping, agility and ball
kicking. The “Summary of findings” table shows that the studies were of moderate,
low and very low level and the “Description of all included studies table shows the
specific results of each study and the risk of bias in each study which was varying
from high and unclear to low risk of bias.

Overall completeness and applicability of evidence

The databases that were selected for this review were the most appropriate due to the
time frame of the thesis and the nature of the study. If the study was to be repeated the
Medline database could be added. The findings of this review are applicable to
physical education teachers, soccer trainers, soccer players and generally athletes.
This review showed that young (under 20 years old) soccer players can be benefited
from the use of plyometric training along with their regular soccer training in crucial
factors of soccer performance such as sprinting, jumping, agility and kicking ability.
The researchers in most of the studies observed significant improvements in these
aspects of performance that they study. These aspects can help young soccer players
improve their sport performance a fact that can enhance their overall soccer
performance in a game. More specifically, in the studies of this review took part
young soccer players between 10 and 19 years old, all of them male except for one
study (Rubley et al, 2011) which subjects were female. All the studies were recent as
they were published after 2000. On all studies there were subjects that participated in
control groups of regular soccer training and in intervention groups of several week
period that included plyometric training programs that consisted of bilateral and
horizontal vertical and horizontal jumps, drop jumps squat jumps and hurdle jumps.
Then they were tested in corresponding performance tests in sprinting, jumping,
agility (change of direction) and kicking distance. On the majority of studies, it was
shown that the intervention groups who followed plyometric training for a specific
period of time as supplementary training along with their regular soccer training, had
significant improvements in the performance test that they executed.

30
Quality of the evidence

The assessment of the quality of evidence was one of the most important factors of the
review. The total 24 studies included an adequate number of subjects (877) and 17 of
them were randomized trials and started at the “high level” according to GRADE and
7 were of experimental design and started at the “low level”. Four of the randomized
studies downgraded to “moderate level” because of imprecision of results due to the
small number of subjects included, 13 were downgraded to “low level” because of
limitation in design and imprecision of results due to the small number of subjects
included and the 7 experimental studies were downgraded to the “very low level” due
to limitations in design. Therefore, these assessments influence the confidence of the
review which generally is limited, and the true effect may be substantially different
from the estimate of the effect.

Potential biases of the review process

To avoid biases during the review the author followed some steps. The first was to do
a systematic electronic search process (Higgins and Green 2011) and the second was a
thorough search of the reference lists. The third step was the use of the GRADE
method to assess the quality of evidence in the review, which is a standardized
method for this purpose, although it can lead to different judgements among
researchers. Therefore, the potential risk of biases of the review can be the electronic
search for relevant studies on the possible resources, the differences in the GRADE
judgement of the studies and the low quality level of a large number of the studies
included.

Agreements and disagreements with other studies or reviews

The literature review studies of Michailidis (2014) and Bedoya et al, (2015) support
the idea that soccer training when is supplemented with plyometric training have
beneficial effects on explosive actions of football players such as sprinting, jumping,
agility and ball kicking. More specifically, the study of Bedoya et al, (2015) consisted
of 7 articles while the article of Michailidis (2014) consisted of 9 articles. Concerning
the methodology, the authors used in their studies, Bedoya et al (2015) selected as
inclusion criteria studies that used plyometric training programs to assess
athletic performance, studies with soccer athletes as subjects, aged 10 up to 17years
old, and studies that were published from 2000 to January 2014. The articles were

31
searched in the following databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Academic Search Premier,
SPORTDiscus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature
(CINAHL). Michailidis (2014) selected the articles that he used in his study according
to the following criteria: a) the inclusion of peopl under 18 years old, b) the inclusion
of soccer players, c) the description of the outcomes of a plyometric exercise
intervention, d) the inclusion of measures of strength, running speed or jumping
ability e) the use of a randomized control trial or quasi experimental design and f) the
publication in peer-reviewed journals. The articles that were used in his study were
published until 2014 and the databases used were the MEDLINE, the Scopus and the
SportDiscus. Also, both these studies used the PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence
Database) scale (PEDro scale) to determine the quality of the evidence for each article
of their studies, in opposition to the current review that used the GRADE system for
the quality of the evidence of the studies that were included. Concerning the results on
these studies all of them used similar valid and reliable performance tests and in the
most of them there were shown significant improvements in the aspects that were
tested such as sprinting, jumping, agility and ball kicking like in the current study.
Both studies suggest twice to three times a week program for 8-10 weeks beginning at
50-60 jumps the first week and progress to 100-120 by the end in agreement with this
study.

Author’s conclusions

Implications for practice

The level of evidence of the review is moderate which means that further research is
likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may
change the estimate.The author recommends that young soccer players could enhance
their motor performance including explosive actions such as sprinting, jumping,
agility and ball kicking with the use of plyometric training along with their regular
soccer training. It is of great importance though that the soccer coaches and the
players should initially take into serious consideration the safety guidelines and get
familiarized with the techniques of the plyometric training exercises. It is suggested
that plyometric training can be used twice a week with graduate progress in each
session, preferably on stable surfaces and in combination with strength and soccer
training on age groups between 11 and 19 years old. The study suggests the use of

32
plyometric training twice to three times a week program for 8-10 weeks beginning at
50-60 jumps the first week and progress to 100-120 by the end to avoid injuries
because of overuse. The level of evidence of the review is moderate which means that
further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the
estimate of effect and may change the estimate.

Implications for research

The future research in this field should include more articles of randomized control
type with increased quality of evidence and lower risk of bias. Moreover, more
interventions about ball kicking ability should be done as there are not a lot so far.
Lastly, it is of great importance for the authors in the future to assess the physiological
mechanisms that contribute to the increase of these aspects of performance that comes
with plyometric training.

Declaration of interest

The author has no conflict of interest relating to this study. There were no sources of
funding to assist this review.

33
References

Bedoya, A, Miltenberger, M, & Lopez, R (2015), 'Plyometric Training Effects on

Athletic Performance in Youth Soccer Athletes: A Systematic Review',
Journal of Strength And Conditioning Research, 29, 8, pp. 2351-2360.
Behm, D, Faigenbaum, A, Falk, B, & Klentrou, P 2008, 'Canadian Society for
exercise physiology position paper: resistance training in children and
adolescents', Applied Physiology, Nutrition, And Metabolism, 3, p. 547.
Cavaco, B., Sousa, N., Machado dos Reis, V., Garrido, N., Saavedra, F., Mendes, R.,
& Vilaça-Alves, J. (2014). Short-Term Effects of Complex Training on
Agility with the Ball, Speed, Efficiency of Crossing and Shooting in Youth
Soccer Players. Journal of Human Kinetics, Vol 43, Iss 1, Pp 105-112 (2014),
(1), 105. doi:10.2478/hukin-2014-0095
Chaabene, H., & Negra, Y. (2017). The Effect of Plyometric Training Volume on
Athletic Performance in Prepubertal Male Soccer Players.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 12, 1205-1211.
Chaouachi, M., Granacher, U., Makhlouf, I., Hammami, R., Behm, D. G., &
Chaouachi, A. (2017). Within Session Sequence of Balance and Plyometric
Exercises Does Not Affect Training Adaptations with Youth Soccer Athletes.
Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 16(1), 125–136.
Chtara, M., Rouissi, M., Haddad, M., Chtara, H., Chaalali, A., Owen, A., & Chamari,
K. (2017). Specific physical trainability in elite young soccer players:
efficiency over 6 weeks’ in-season training. Biology of Sport, 34(2), 137–148.
de Hoyo, M, Gonzalo-Skok, O, Sañudo, B, Carrascal, C, Plaza-Armas, J,
Camacho-Candil, F, & Otero-Esquina, C (2016), 'Comparative Effects of In-
Season Full- Back Squat, Resisted Sprint Training, and Plyometric
Training on Explosive Performance in U-19 Elite Soccer Players', Journal Of
Strength And Conditioning Research, 30, 2, pp. 368-377,
De Hoyo, M, Gonzalo-Skok, O, Sadudo, B, Carrascal, C, Plaza - Armas, JR,
Camacho-Candil, F, & Otero-Esquina, C 2016, “Comparative Effects of In-
Season Full-Back Squat, Resisted Sprint Training, and Plyometric Training on
Explosive Performance in U-19 Elite Soccer Players”, Journal of Strength &
Conditioning Research (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins), vol. 30, no. 2, pp.
368-377.

34
Faigenbaum, A, Kraemer, W, Blimkie, C, Jeffreys, I, Micheli, L, Nitka, M, &
Rowland, T (2009), Youth resistance training: Updated position statement
paper from the National Strength and Conditioning Association, Journal Of
Strength & Conditioning Research (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins), 23,
pp. S60-S79.
Franco-Marquez F, Rodriguez- Rossel D, Gonzalez-Suarez JM, Pareja-Blanco F,
Mora-Custodio R, Yanez-Garcia JM, & Gonzalez-Badillo JJ. (2015). Effects
of Combined Resistance Training and Plyometrics on Physical
Performance in Young Soccer Players. International Journal of
Sports Medicine. 36, 906-14.
Granacher, U., Prieske, O., Majewski, M., Busch, D., & Muehlbauer, T. (2015). The
Role of Instability with Plyometric Training in Sub-Elite Adolescent Soccer
Players. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 36, 386-394.
Grant, M. J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14
review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries
Journal, 26, 2, 91–108.
Hammami, M., Negra, Y., Aouadi, R., Shephard, R. J., & Chelly, M. S. (2016).
Effects of an In-season Plyometric Training Program on Repeated Change of
Direction and Sprint Performance in the Junior Soccer Player. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research. 30, 3312-3320.
Higgins, J., Altman, D., Gotzsche, P., Juni, P., Moher, D., Oxman, A., Savovic, J.,
Schulz, K., Weeks, L., & Sterne, J. (2011). The Cochrane Collaboration's tool
for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BRITISH MEDICAL
JOURNAL. 889-893.
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of
interventions. http://handbook.cochrane.org/.
Little T and Williams AG. (2005). Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and
agility in professional soccer players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Research / National Strength & Conditioning Association. 19, pp. 76-78.
Longo Ug, Loppini M, Cavangnino R, Maffulli N, and Denaro V. (2012).
Musculoskeletal problems in soccer players: current concepts. Clinical Cases
in Mineral and Bone Metabolism: The Official Journal of the Italian Society of
Osteoporosis, Mineral Metabolism, and Skeletal Diseases. 9 pp. 107-111.
Loturco, I, Pereira, L, Kobal, R, Zanetti, V, Kitamura, K, Abad, C, & Nakamura, F
35
 (2015), 'Transference effect of vertical and horizontal plyometrics on sprint
performance of high-level U-20 soccer players', Journal Of Sports Sciences,
33, 20, p. 2182.
Markovic, G and Mikulic, (2010) P. Neuro-musculoskeletal and performance
adaptations to lower extremity plyometric training. Sports Medicine 40: pp.
859 – 895,
Meylan, C., & Malatesta, D. (2009). Effects of In-Season Plyometric Training
Within Soccer Practice on Explosive Actions of Young Players. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research. 23, 2605-2613.
Michailidis, Y., et al. (2013). Plyometricsʼ Trainability in Preadolescent Soccer
Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 27, 38-49.
Michailidis, Y, Fatouros, I, Primpa, E, Michailidis, C, Avloniti, A, Chatzinikolaou, A,
Barbero-Álvarez, J, Tsoukas, D, Douroudos, I, Draganidis, D, Leontsini, D,
Margonis, K, Berberidou, F, & Kambas, A (2013), 'Plyometrics' trainability in
preadolescent soccer athletes', Journal Of Strength And Conditioning
Research, 27, 1, pp. 38-49
Michailidis, Y, (2014) ‘Plyometric training programs for young soccer players: a
systematic review’. International Journal of Sport Studies. Vol., 4 (12), pp.
1455 - 1461.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P,
Stewart LA. (2015). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015;4(1):1.
Negra Y., Sammoud S., Bougouezzi R., Hachana Y., Chaabeme H., Abbes
M.A., Granacher U., & Granacher U. (2017). Effects of Plyometric
Training on Physical Fitness in Prepuberal Soccer Athletes.
International Journal of Sports Medicine. 38, 370-377.
Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. (1993). The science of reviewing research. Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences 1993; 703: 125-133.
Ramirez-Campillo, R., et al. (2015). Effect of Progressive Volume- Based Overload
During Plyometric Training on Explosive and Endurance Performance in
Young Soccer Players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.
29, 1884-1893.
Ramirez-Campillo R, Burgos CH, Henriquez-Olguin C, Andrade DC, Martinez C,
Álvarez C, Castro-Sepulveda M, Marques MC, & Izquerdo M. (2015). Effect

36
 of unilateral, bilateral, and combined plyometric training on explosive and
endurance performance of young soccer players. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research. 29, 1317-28.
Ramirez-Campillo, R, Gallardo, F, Henriquez-OlguÍN, C, Meylan, C, MartÍNez, C,
ÁLvarez, C, Caniuqueo, A, Cadore, E, & Izquierdo, M 2015, 'EFFECT OF
vertical, horizontal, and combined plyometric training on explosive,
balance, and endurance performance of young soccer players, Journal Of
Strength & Conditioning Research (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins), 29, 7,
pp. 1784-1795.
Rubley, M, Haase, A, Holcomb, W, Girouard, T, & Tandy, R 2011, 'The effect of
plyometric training on power and kicking distance in female adolescent soccer
players', Journal Of Strength And Conditioning Research, 25, 1, pp. 129-134.
Saez DE Villareal, E., Suarez-Arrones, L., Requena, B., Haff, G. G., & Ferrete,
C. (2015). Effects of Plyometric and Sprint Training on Physical and
Technical Skill Performance in Adolescent Soccer Players. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research. 29, 1894-1903.
Schopfel, J. (2011). Towards a Prague Definition of Grey Literature. Grey Journal -
Amsterdam-. 7, pp 5-18.
Schünemann, H. J., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Higgins, J. P., Deeks, J. J., Glasziou,
P. and Guyatt, G. H. (2008) Interpreting Results and Drawing Conclusions, in
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane
Book Series (eds J. P. Higgins and S. Green), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd,
Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/9780470712184.ch12
Slimani, M, Paravlić, A, & Bragazzi, N 2017, 'Data Article: Data concerning the
effect of plyometric training on jump performance in soccer players: A meta-
analysis', Data In Brief, 15, pp. 324-334.
Söhnlein, Q, Müller, E, & Stöggl, T (2014), 'The effect of 16-week plyometric
training on explosive actions in early to mid-puberty elite soccer
players', Journal Of Strength And Conditioning Research, 28, 8, pp. 2105-
2114.
Vergnes JN, Marchal-Sixou C, Nabet C, Maret D, & Hamel O. (2010). Ethics in
systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Ethics. 36, pp. 771-4.
Wang, Y.-C., & Zhang, N. (2016). Effects of plyometric training on soccer

37
players. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 12(2), 550–554.

38
PO Box 823, SE-301 18 Halmstad
Phone: +35 46 16 71 00
E-mail: registrator@hh.se
www.hh.se