BackgroundSoccer is the most popular sport worldwide, with a long history and currently more than 500 million active participants, of whom 300 million are registered football club members. On the basis of scientific findings showing positive fitness and health effects of recreational soccer, FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) introduced the slogan “Playing football for 45 min twice a week—best prevention of non-communicable diseases” in 2010.ObjectiveThe objective of this paper was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to determine the effects of recreational soccer on maximal oxygen uptake ().MethodsSix electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar) were searched for original research articles. A manual search was performed to cover the areas of recreational soccer, recreational physical activity, recreational small-sided games and using the following key terms, either singly or in combination: recreational small-sided games, recreational football, recreational soccer, street football, street soccer, effect, maximal oxygen uptake, peak oxygen uptake, cardiorespiratory fitness, . The inclusion criteria were divided into four sections: type of study, type of participants, type of interventions and type of outcome measures. Probabilistic magnitude-based inferences for meta-analysed effects were based on standardised thresholds for small, moderate and large changes (0.2, 0.6 and 1.2, respectively) derived from between-subject standard deviations for baseline fitness.ResultsSeventeen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Mean differences showed that increased by 3.51 mL/kg/min (95 % CI 3.07–4.15) over a recreational soccer training programme in comparison with other training models. The meta-analysed effects of recreational soccer on compared with the controls of no exercise, continuous running and strength training were most likely largely beneficial [effect size (ES) = 1.46; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.91, 2.01; I2 = 88.35 %], most likely moderately beneficial (ES = 0.68; 95 % CI 0.06, 1.29; I2 = 69.13 %) and most likely moderately beneficial (ES = 1.08; 95 % CI −0.25, 2.42; I2 = 71.06 %), respectively. In men and women, the meta-analysed effect was most likely largely beneficial for men (ES = 1.22) and most likely moderately beneficial for women (ES = 0.96) compared with the controls. After 12 weeks of recreational soccer with an intensity of 78–84 % maximal heart rate (HRmax), healthy untrained men improved their by 8–13 %, while untrained elderly participants improved their by 15–18 %. Soccer training for 12–70 weeks in healthy women resulted in an improvement in of 5–16 %. Significant improvements in have been observed in patients with diabetes mellitus, hypertension and prostate cancer.ConclusionRecreational soccer produces large improvements in compared to strength training and no exercise, regardless of the age, sex and health status of the...
background A previous meta-analysis showed that maximal oxygen uptake increased by 3.51 mL/ kg/min (95% CI 3.07 to 4.15) during a recreational football programme of 3-6 months in comparison with continuous moderate-intensity running, strength training or a passive control group. In addition, narrative reviews have demonstrated beneficial effects of recreational football on physical fitness and health status. Objective The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the magnitude of effects of recreational football on blood pressure, body composition, lipid profile and muscular fitness with reference to age, gender and health status. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Google Scholar were searched prior to 1 February 2017. In addition, Google Scholar alerts were set up in January 2012 to identify potential papers with the following key terms: recreational football, recreational soccer, street football and street soccer. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised and matched controlled trials with participants allocated to a recreational football group or any other type of exercises or passive control group were included. Training programmes had to last at least 2 weeks to meet the inclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures were blood pressure, resting heart rate, body composition, muscular fitness, and blood lipids and glucose tolerance. A total of 31 papers met the inclusion criteria and were included. Results The effect of recreational football on systolic blood pressure (SBP) versus no-exercise controls was most likely extremely largely beneficial (effect size (ES)=4.20 mm Hg; 95% CI 1.87 to 6.53). In addition, a most likely very large beneficial (ES=3.89 mm Hg; 95% CI 2.33 to 5.44) effect was observed for diastolic blood pressure (DBP), when compared with non-active groups. Furthermore, a most likely extremely large beneficial effect was shown for SBP and DBP in participants with mild hypertension (11 and 7 mm Hg decrease, respectively) and participants with prehypertension (10 and 7 mm Hg decrease, respectively). Meta-analysis of recreational football determined the impact on resting heart rate as most likely extremely largely beneficial (ES=6.03 beats/min; 95% CI 4.43 to 7.64) when compared with non-active groups. The observed recreational football effect on fat mass was most likely largely beneficial (ES=1.72 kg; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.58) and the effect on countermovement jump (CMJ) performance was most likely very largely beneficial (ES=2.27 cm; 95% CI 1.29 to 3.25) when compared with non-active groups. Possibly beneficial decreases were found in low-density lipoprotein levels (ES=0.21 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.36). Possibly largely beneficial effect was observed for DBP in comparison with continuous running training. Small harmful and unclear results were noted for SBP, fat and lean body mass, body mass index, as well as muscu...
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine the reliability, validity and usefulness of the 30–15IFT in competitive female soccer players.METHODS: Seventeen elite female soccer players participated in the study. A within subject test-retest study design was utilized to assess the reliability of the 30–15 intermittent fitness test (IFT). Seven days prior to 30–15IFT, subjects performed a continuous aerobic running test (CT) under laboratory conditions to assess the criterion validity of the 30–15IFT. End running velocity (VCT and VIFT), peak heart rate (HRpeak) and maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) were collected and/or estimated for both tests.RESULTS: VIFT (ICC = 0.91; CV = 1.8%), HRpeak (ICC = 0.94; CV = 1.2%), and VO2max (ICC = 0.94; CV = 1.6%) obtained from the 30–15IFT were all deemed highly reliable (p > 0.05). Pearson product moment correlations between the CT and 30–15IFT for VO2max, HRpeak and end running velocity were large (r = 0.67, p = 0.013), very large (r = 0.77, p = 0.02) and large (r = 0.57, p = 0.042), respectively.CONCLUSION: Current findings suggest that the 30–15IFT is a valid and reliable intermittent aerobic fitness test of elite female soccer players. The findings have also provided practitioners with evidence to support the accurate detection of meaningful individual changes in VIFT of 0.5 km/h (1 stage) and HRpeak of 2 bpm. This information may assist coaches in monitoring “real” aerobic fitness changes to better inform training of female intermittent team sport athletes. Lastly, coaches could use the 30–15IFT as a practical alternative to laboratory based assessments to assess and monitor intermittent aerobic fitness changes in their athletes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.