Review article - (2025)24, 236 - 257
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52082/jssm.2025.236
Effects of Physical Training Programs on Healthy Athletes’ Vertical Jump Height: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis
Shuzhen Ma1,2, Yanqi Xu3, Simao Xu4,
1School of Public Administration, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, China
2Department of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
3College of Materials Science and Engineering, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, China
4College of physical education and health, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China

Simao Xu
✉ College of physical education and health, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541006, China
Email: xusimao666@163.com
Received: 31-08-2024 -- Accepted: 10-03-2025
Published (online): 01-06-2025
ABSTRACT

Various physical training programs are widely used to enhance vertical jump height, but their relative effectiveness remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate effectiveness of four training methods -weight resistance, plyometric, complex, and routine training- on vertical jump height. A comprehensive search of six databases (PubMed, ERIC, Google Scholar, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Scopus) identified relevant studies coded based on training type, modality, and outcome measures. Methodological quality and statistical analysis were assessed using PEDro scale and R (version 4.1.3) with the 'meta' package. Eight studies revealed that plyometric training and weight resistance exercise increased vertical jump by 5.2 cm (95% CI: 2.6, 7.7 cm; I2 = 4.7%) and 9.9 cm (95% CI: 6.7, 13.5 cm; I2 = 0.0%), while improved squat jump by 1.5 cm (95% CI: 0.2, 2.6 cm; I2 = 0.0%) and 3.1 cm (95% CI: 0.2, 2.6 cm; I2 = 16.9%) compared to routine training. Fifteen studies indicated that plyometric training, weight resistance exercise, and complex training increased countermovement jump by 2.0 cm (95% CI: 1.4, 3.7 cm; I2 = 0.0%), 2.2 cm (95% CI: 1.4, 3.7 cm; I2 = 0.0%), and 5.0 cm (95% CI: 2.5, 7.6 cm; I2 = 0.0%) compared to routine training. Complex training was more effective than weight resistance (2.6 cm; 95% CI: 0.2, 5.5 cm) and plyometric training (2.9 cm; 95% CI: 0.2, 5.8 cm), with no significant difference between weight resistance and plyometric training (0.2 cm; 95% CI: -1.0, 2.0 cm). Heterogeneity was low for most comparisons (I2 = 0.0% to 16.9%), indicating consistent results across different interventions. This meta-analysis demonstrates that plyometric, weight resistance, and complex training significantly improve vertical, squat, and countermovement jump performance. Weight resistance is effective for vertical and stationary vertical jumps, while complex training is most effective for countermovement jumps.
Key words: Physical training programs, vertical jump, athletes, statistical analyses, training performance

Key Points
  • Plyometric, weight resistance, and complex training programs significantly enhance vertical jump, squat jump, and countermovement jump performances in athletes, providing valuable evidence for optimizing training regimens.
  • Weight resistance training is particularly effective in improving vertical jump and squat jump, whereas complex training is superior for enhancing countermovement jump performances. There is no significant difference between weight resistance and plyometric training for vertical jump improvements.
  • The low heterogeneity (I ranging from 0.0% to 16.9%) across studies suggests a high level of consistency and reliability in the findings, supporting robust conclusions about the effectiveness of different physical training programs on jump performance in athletes.








Back		 |
Full Text		 |
PDF		 |
Share

Email link to this article

Effects of Physical Training Programs on Healthy Athletes’ Vertical Jump Height: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis
Shuzhen Ma, Yanqi Xu, Simao Xu
2025(24), 236 - 257.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52082/jssm.2025.236