Chronic effects of flywheel training on physical capacities in soccer players: a systematic review

Abstract

The aims of the current systematic review were to evaluate the current literature surrounding the chronic effect of flywheel training on the physical capacities of soccer players, and to identify areas for future research to establish guidelines for its use. Studies were identified following a search of electronic databases (PubMed and SPORTDiscus) in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA). Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. The methodological quality of the included studies ranged between 10 and 18 with an average score of 15 points using the PEDro scale.The training duration ranged from 6 weeks to 27 weeks, with volume ranging from 1 to 6 sets and 6 to 10 repetitions, and frequency from 1 to 2 times a week. This systematic review reported that a diverse range of flywheel training interventions can effectively improve strength, power, jump, and changes of direction in male soccer players of varying levels. Flywheel training interventions improve the physical capacities of soccer players of varying levels. Nonetheless, the current literature suggests contrasting evidence regarding flywheel training induced changes in sprint speed and acceleration capacity of soccer players.

Intra- and Inter-Limb Strength Asymmetry in Soccer: A Comparison of Professional and Under-18 Players

“…The authors believe that the knowledge of players' anterior-posterior strength imbalances may help practitioners to individualise lower-limbs strength training programmes in order to reduce these side-to-side differences. Furthermore, given the emphasis that recent publications have placed on strength training for soccer players [21,40,41], this seems like an important suggestion.…”

The effect of flywheel training on strength and physical capacities in sporting and healthy populations: An umbrella review

“…The methodological quality of the 11 included reviews is presented in Tables 2 and 3. Two reviews were rated as high quality [9,15], while six were considered moderate quality [4,14,28,[39][40][41] and three of low quality [2,8,13] using the AMSTAR 2 checklist. Critically, several AMSTAR 2 criteria were not met by a majority of reviews included [35].…”

“…Furthermore, most reviews included did not consider the likelihood of publication bias (item 15). According to the adapted GRADE principles applied in the present umbrella review, five investigations were rated as high quality [4,15,28,39,40]. One review was rated as moderate quality [14], while the other five reviews did not critically appraise the included studies and could therefore not be assigned a GRADE rating [2,8,9,13,41].…”

“…Specifically, key information for the reviews included can be found in Table 1. Two included reviews were systematic reviews [28,39], six were systematic reviews with meta-analyses [4,9,14,15,40,41], while three were narrative reviews [2,8,13].…”

Load Quantification and Testing Using Flywheel Devices in Sports

“…For such a reason, the first mechanical gravity independent device was developed to overcome these limitations, allowing crews to train in microgravity situations and limiting the deleterious effects of space flights (Berg and Tesch, 1994). After the first pioneering studies, sport scientists and later on, practitioners, understood the advantages offered by flywheel technology and they started to use it for training purposes such as performance development, injury prevention, and clinical rehabilitation (Askling et al, 2003;Tous-Fajardo et al, 2006;Tesch et al, 2017;Allen et al, 2021;Mcerlain-Naylor and Beato, 2021).…”