快速伸缩复合训练对大学生男子100米运动员下肢爆发力影响的随机对照实验

Effects of Plyometric Training on Lower Limb Explosive Power in Collegiate Male 100-m Sprinters: A Randomized Controlled Trial

摘要: 目的：比较快速伸缩复合训练(plyometric training)与传统抗阻训练对大学生男子100 m运动员下肢爆发力的干预效果，并基于场地与实验室双层面指标初步探究其神经肌肉适应机制。方法：以36名男子100 m运动员为实验对象，按前测成绩排序后交替分配至实验组(n = 18)与对照组(n = 18)，分别实施为期8周、每周3次的plyometric训练与传统抗阻训练。以100 m跑、立定跳远及原地摸高为场地指标，以反向纵跳(CMJ)、蹲跳(SJ)等长发力率(RFD)及分段支撑时间与步频为实验室指标，全程以主观疲劳等级(RPE) × 训练时间监控负荷。组间比较采用独立样本t检验，以Bonferroni法校正多重比较(α′ = 0.0042)，并计算Cohen’s d效应量。结果：(1) 8周后，实验组全部9项指标均较前测显著改善(P < 0.001)，对照组仅立定跳远(P = 0.001)及RFD(P = 0.033)出现提升。(2) 组间比较显示，实验组在9项指标上均显著优于对照组(P < 0.05, d = 0.71~1.07)，CMJ-SJ差值的增大与RFD的提升暗示SSC效率与神经驱动水平可能为潜在的适应机制，但上述推断尚待直接测量手段的验证。

Abstract: Objective: To compare the effects of plyometric training versus traditional resistance training on lower limb explosive power in collegiate male 100-m sprinters and to preliminarily explore the underlying neuromuscular adaptation mechanisms using both field- and laboratory-based assessments. Methods: Thirty-six male 100-m sprinters were alternately assigned to an experimental group (EG, n = 18) and a control group (CG, n = 18) based on ranked pre-test 100-m performance. The EG underwent an 8-week plyometric training program (3 sessions/week), while the CG performed traditional resistance training (3 sessions/week) over the same period. Field-based outcome measures included the 100-m sprint time, standing long jump, and vertical jump height. Laboratory-based measures included the countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), rate of force development (RFD), estimated support time, and step frequency. Training load was monitored throughout using the session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) method. Between-group differences were examined using independent-samples t-tests with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (adjusted α′ = 0.0042), supplemented by Cohen’s d effect sizes. Results: (1) After 8 weeks, all 9 performance indicators in the experimental group showed significant improvement compared with the pre-test values (P < 0.001), whereas only the standing long jump (P = 0.001) and RFD (P = 0.033) demonstrated improvements in the control group. (2) Intergroup comparisons revealed that the experimental group outperformed the control group significantly across all 9 indicators (P < 0.05, d = 0.71~1.07); the increase in the CMJ-SJ difference and the improvement in RFD suggest that SSC efficiency and neural drive level may represent potential adaptive mechanisms; however, these inferences require further validation through direct measurement methods.