The Effects of Aquatic Plyometric Training on Repeated Jumps, Drop Jumps and Muscle Damage.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of land- vs. aquatic based plyometric training programs on the drop jump, repeated jump performance and muscle damage. Sixty-five male students were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: aquatic plyometric training group (APT), plyometric training group (PT) and control group (CG). Both experimental groups trained twice a week for 10 weeks performing the same number of sets and total jumps. The following variables were measured prior to, halfway through and after the training programs: creatine kinase (CK) concentration, maximal height during a drop jump from the height of 30 (DJ30) and 50 cm (DJ50), and mean height during a repeated vertical jump test (RJ). The training program resulted in a significant increase (P<0.01-0.001) in RJ, DJ30, and DJ50 for PT, whereas neither APT nor CG reached any significant improvement APT showed likely/possibly improvements on DJ30 and DJ50, respectively. Greater intra-group Effect Size in CK was found for PT when compared to APT. In conclusion, although APT seems to be a safe alternative method for reducing the stress produced on the musculoskeletal system by plyometric training, PT produced greater gains on reactive jumps performance than APT.

Efectos del entrenamiento pliométrico acuático vs. seco sobre el salto vertical / Effects of land vs. aquatic plyometric training on vertical jump

El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar los efectos de dos programas de entrenamiento pliométrico (inmersión vs. seco) sobre el salto vertical. 65 hombres físicamente activos fueron asignados aleatoriamente a tres grupos: entrenamiento pliométrico acuático (EPA, n 20), entrenamiento pliométrico (EP, n=20) y grupo control (GC, n=25). Los grupos EPA y EP entrenaron 2 sesiones por semana durante 10 semanas, mientras que GC no realizó entrenamiento alguno. El volumen de entrenamiento fue aumentado desde 10 series de 10 repeticiones en la primera semana hasta 10 series de 55 repeticiones en la última. Tanto EPA como EP aumentaron su rendimiento en CMJ y SJ con respecto al pretest (P≤0,001) sin encontrar diferencias significativas entre grupos, mientras que GC no mostró cambios. Como conclusión, el EPA puede ser un método alternativo a EP ya que ambos producen similares mejoras sobre el salto vertical y el estrés mecánico producido por EPA es menor (AU)

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two plyometric training program (aquatic vs. land) on vertical jump. 65 male physical education students took part in this study and were randomly assigned to three groups: aquatic plyometric training group (APT, n = 20), plyometric training group (PT, n = 20) and control group (CG, n = 25). The training program was performed for 10 weeks with a frequency of 2 sessions per week. Volume was increased from 10 sets of 10 repetitions to 10 sets of 55 repetitions. Both APT and PT increased the performance in CMJ and SJ with respect to pretest (P ≤ .001), whereas CG remained unaltered. No statistically significant difference was observed between APT and PT. In conclusion, APT may be an alternative method to PT, because both training protocols have produced similar gains in the vertical jump, but APT might cause lower mechanical stress (AU)