Efficacy for Plyometrics for Runners.
A Literature Review
by
Dr. Mark T. Rathjen PT, DPT, CSCS
and
Dr. Claire Rathjen PT, DPT, SCS, CSCS
Objectives: The goal of this literature review is to facilitate the discussion and inclusion of the efficacy of plyometric training to various athletic groups, specifically running for the scope of this review
Conclusion: Plyometric routines have been shown in multiple diverse population groups, ability levels, and sports to be effective in improving sports performance, improve economy and enhance physical ability beyond sport participation and strength training. A plyometric routine is essential to extract the maximum genetic potential from an athlete while remaining injury free during the sports performance training routine.
In various studies with differing parameters and protocols/activity levels, benefits of increased running economy, performance, and strength have been shown in as little as 6 weeks basic plyometric program.
At CORE we are working on development of a running specific 6/12 week plyometric program for beginners and more advanced runners. Stay Tuned for the protocols that we will release soon!
Improvement in Running Economy after 6 Weeks of Plyometric Training.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, v17 n1 p60-67 Feb 2003
Turner, Amanda M.; Owings, Matt; Schwane, James A.
Investigated whether a 6-week regimen of plyometric training would improve running economy. Data were collected on 18 regular but not highly trained distance runners who participated in either regular running training or plyometric training. Results indicated that 6 weeks of plyometric training improved running economy at selected speeds in this group of runners. The mechanism must still be determined. (SM)
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003 Mar;89(1):1-7. Epub 2002 Dec 24.
The effect of plyometric training on distance running performance.
Spurrs RW1, Murphy AJ, Watsford ML.
Abstract
Previous research has reported that plyometric training improves running economy (RE) and ultimately distance-running performance, although the exact mechanism by which this occurs remains unclear. This study examined whether changes in running performance resulting from plyometric training were related to alterations in lower leg musculotendinous stiffness (MTS). Seventeen male runners were pre- and post-tested for lower leg MTS, maximum isometric force, rate of force development, 5-bound distance test (5BT), counter movement jump (CMJ) height, RE, VO(2max), lactate threshold (Th(la)), and 3-km time. Subjects were randomly split into an experimental (E) group which completed 6 weeks of plyometric training in conjunction with their normal running training, and a control (C) group which trained as normal. Following the training period, the E group significantly improved 3-km performance (2.7%) and RE at each of the tested velocities, while no changes in VO(2max) or Th(la) were recorded. CMJ height, 5BT, and MTS also increased significantly. No significant changes were observed in any measures for the C group.
The results clearly demonstrated that a 6-week plyometric program led to improvements in 3-km running performance. It is postulated that the increase in MTS resulted in improved RE. We speculate that the improved RE led to changes in 3-km running performance, as there were no corresponding alterations in VO(2max) or Th(la).
In this study, researchers found that after plyometric training subjects demonstrated improvements of 2.7 percent in their jumping ability, 3K time, and running economy at 8, 7, and 6 minutes per mile. This result is encouraging, showing that for more experienced runners, the potential benefits of plyometric training is even greater.
Short-term plyometric training improves running economy in highly trained middle and long distance runners.
J Strength Cond Res. 2006 Nov;20(4):947-54.
Saunders PU1, Telford RD, Pyne DB, Peltola EM, Cunningham RB, Gore CJ, Hawley JA.
Abstract
Fifteen highly trained distance runners VO(2)max 71.1 +/- 6.0 ml.min(-1).kg(-1), mean +/- SD) were randomly assigned to a plyometric training (PLY; n = 7) or control (CON; n = 8) group. In addition to their normal training, the PLY group undertook 3 x 30 minutes PLY sessions per week for 9 weeks. Running economy (RE) was assessed during 3 x 4 minute treadmill runs (14, 16, and 18 km.h(-1)), followed by an incremental test to measure VO(2)max. Muscle power characteristics were assessed on a portable, unidirectional ground reaction force plate. Compared with CON, PLY improved RE at 18 km.h(-1) (4.1%, p = 0.02), but not at 14 or 16 km.h(-1). This was accompanied by trends for increased average power during a 5-jump plyometric test (15%, p = 0.11), a shorter time to reach maximal dynamic strength during a strength quality assessment test (14%, p = 0.09), and a lower VO(2)-speed slope (14%, p = 0.12) after 9 weeks of PLY. There were no significant differences in cardiorespiratory measures or VO(2)max as a result of PLY. In a group of highly-trained distance runners, 9 weeks of PLY improved RE, with likely mechanisms residing in the muscle, or alternatively by improving running mechanics.
With elite runners found that after 9 weeks of plyometric training, runners showed a 4.1% improvement in running economy at 5:20 mile pace and a nonsignificant trend toward improvement at 6:00 and 7:00 mile pace. The authors interpreted this as an indication that plyometric training is more beneficial at higher speeds, since the impact forces are much higher. Additionally, since there was no change in maximal oxygen uptake ability (VO2 max), the results point to the muscles, not the heart or blood vessels, as the cause of the improvement in economy. While the blood delivered the same amount of oxygen to the muscles before and after the 9-week training program, the plyometrics-trained runners could go faster with it.
Plyometric training, running economy, and marathon running
Lundstrom, Christopher John (2015)
Issue Date
2015-03
Thesis or Dissertation
Abstract
Plyometric training (PLYO) improves running economy (RE) and performance in distance races up to 5-km in competitive runners. Core training (CORE) is widely practiced by distance runners, though there is little evidence for its efficacy in improving performance or preventing injury. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a weekly PLYO or CORE training program over a 12-week marathon training period on a population of recreational marathon runners. Sprint, jump, and distance running performance, and training variables were assessed. In addition, different approaches to quantifying RE were examined. Competitive (COMP) and recreational (REC) runners were compared, and RE variables were used to model marathon performance. Sprint performance improved with PLYO training. Jump performance was maintained with PLYO training while it decreased in the CORE group. No differences were found in training variables between PLYO, CORE and a no additional training (CON) group, though limited evidence suggests a potential benefit of PLYO training. Other groups increased from baseline (a run-in period of 8 weeks) to the marathon training period in rate of perceived exertion, soreness, and days missed due to injury, while the PLYO group did not experience these negative changes. In addition, pre-marathon creatine kinase (CK) levels were lower in PLYO than CORE runners, and post-marathon CK levels trended toward lower as well. Assessment of RE factors found that correcting 02 utilization for velocity is important in capturing differences between COMP and REC runners, with COMP runners using less O2 per km. This measure was a significant predictor of marathon performance. Within groups, the use of allometric scaling was important in using RE to model marathon performance. Implementation of PLYO training in a population of recreational marathoners can improve sprint and maintain jump performance, but the benefits do not transfer to distance running performance, including RE. Other benefits to health and training variables may be seen, and may be more important to this population.
Running economy is an important predictor of marathon performance. Competitive runners are more economical than REC runners and more economical runners perform better in the marathon, relative to their shorter distance performances.
Other Abstracts
In Sato and Mokha’s (2009) study, 28 recreational runners with 5k PRs just under 30 minutes were divided into an experimental and control group. During the six week experiment, both groups continued their normal training routines, but the experimental group was given a set of five exercises to be performed four times a week in 2-3 sets of 10-15 repeats each.
The exercises—crunches on an exercise ball, back extensions on an exercise ball, opposite arm-leg raises while lying on the stomach, hip “bridges” on an exercise ball, and “Russian twists” (twisting the torso side-to-side while in a sit-up position) on an exercise ball—were all targeted at the hip and torso muscles, which are thought to contribute to stability while running.
The researchers hoped that strengthening these muscles would lead to better running form and a performance boost to boot. Interestingly, the exercise program did not lead to improvements in running form, but did lead to a moderate improvement in running performance. The experimental group dropped their 5k time by 47 seconds, while the control group only improved 17 seconds.
A 2008 study by Øyvind Støren and coworkers in Norway examined a more rigorous program focusing on raw leg strength. 3 Støren’s protocol was four sets of four half-squats with a barbell, three times a week with three minutes of recovery, with nearly the heaviest weight the subjects could manage.
Seventeen runners (nine men and eight women) with 5k bests in the 18:40-range partook, with nine in the experimental group and eight in the control group. All of the subjects carried out their normal training during the eight week study and underwent the usual battery of physiology tests before and after the study.
The results stand in contrast to Ferruati’s study: Støren’s subjects displayed no increase in oxygen intake but a 5% increase in running economy and a startling 21% improvement in a treadmill run to exhaustion at somewhat faster than 3k race pace vs. the control group, who had no improvement on either mark. Støren et al. chalk up the improvements to increased muscular efficiency.
The runners who completed the half-squat protocol not only became stronger, but also more powerful—they were able to generate force much more quickly after the strength program. The researchers proposed that this allowed them to have a “quicker” stride and save energy while running.
Philo Saunders and his coworkers at the Australian Institute of Sport4 managed to round up fifteen elite runners and have seven of them undergo a nine-week explosive lifting and jump training program. All of the runners had 3km PRs around 8:30 (equivalent to well under 15 minutes for 5km) and six of them had competed internationally.
Accordingly, the strength program they did was fairly comprehensive: three sessions a week, split between gym exercises like the leg press, hamstring curls, and back extension, and outdoor sessions done on grass consisting of bounding, skipping, double-legged hurdle jumping, and scissor jumps. As usual, both groups continued with their normal training.
At the conclusion of the study, the strength program group displayed a 4% increase in running economy at fast speeds and a smaller, non-statistically significant increase in running economy at slower speeds vs. the control group. Just like in Støren et al., these elite runners also were able to generate force more quickly, which probably accounts for their improved economy.