Introduction: Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) is widely used to enhance explosive performance. Chain Squats (CS), as a form of variable resistance training, may offer advantages over Traditional Squats (TS) due to its load variability and neuromuscular stimulation characteristics. However, direct comparisons between the two under controlled conditions remain limited. Therefore, this study aims to compare the effects of CS and TS on PAPE to explore their different impacts on explosive strength.Methods: Eighteen male participants completed CS and TS training at 90% of their 1RM in a randomized crossover design. Countermovement Jump (CMJ) tests were conducted at baseline and at 4, 8, 12, and 16 min post-intervention to evaluate Jump Height (JH), Peak Power (PP), Peak Rate of Force Development (PRFD), and Peak Impulse (PI).Results: Both CS and TS significantly enhanced explosive performance, but CS outperformed TS in several metrics. CS showed greater improvements in JH at 4 min (P < 0.01, η² = 0.119, d = 3.69) and 8 min (P < 0.01, η² = 0.102, d = 3.49). For PP, CS also outperformed TS with larger effect sizes at the same time points. PRFD showed no significant change in either modality, but CS showed a downward trend at 12 min (P = 0.055, η² = −0.014, d = −424.16). PI peaked at 4 min in the CS group (P < 0.01, η² = 0.019, d = 6.56), significantly outperforming TS.Discussion: CS significantly outperformed TS in enhancing JH, PP, and PI during the 4-8 min post-intervention period. Compared to TS, CS is a more advantageous PAPE strategy, offering a more effective way to enhance explosive performance in athletes.

In recent years, technologies in the field of gait monitoring, such as gait parameter analysis, health monitoring, and medical diagnosis, have become increasingly mature. Gait monitoring technology has emerged as an effective means for disease prevention and diagnosis. Triboelectric nanogenerator technology not only overcomes the limitations of relying on external power sources and frequent battery replacements but also offers advantages such as low cost, lightweight, a wide range of material options, and ease of manufacturing. This review introduces the common working modes of triboelectric nanogenerators and summarizes recent advances in self-powered gait monitoring applications (e.g., gait analysis, fall detection, rehabilitation assessment, and identity recognition), and highlights persistent challenges such as wearability, washability of fabric-based devices, reliability, system integration, and miniaturization, along with proposed solutions.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of isometric resistance training (IRT) in lowering blood pressure through meta-analyses, specifically systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP), in individuals with pre-hypertension to established hypertension. Additionally, it seeks to identify potential moderators that influence the blood pressure–lowering effects of IRT. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Web of Science (Core Collection), PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CNKI to identify studies employing a between-group design in individuals with pre-hypertension to established hypertension that assessed the effects of IRT on blood pressure. The initial search was performed in February 2024 and updated in May 2025. A multilevel meta-analysis was conducted to pool effect estimates for each outcome, reported as mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD). Heterogeneity was examined using subgroup analyses, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses. Results: The present meta-review included 30 original studies, and meta- analysis results suggested compared to the control group, IRT significant reductions in SBP by 7.31 mmHg (SMD = -0.76, I² = 75%, moderate certainty of evidence), DBP by 3.90 mmHg (SMD = -0.54, I² = 48%, low certainty of evidence), and MAP by 5.94 mmHg (SMD = -0.92, I² = 53%, moderate certainty of evidence) among individuals with pre-hypertension to established hypertension (p < 0.01 for all). Sensitivity analysis confirmed that the above combined results were stable and there was no risk of publication bias. Subgroup analyses identified region, health status, medication use, training mode, interval duration, and frequency as significant moderators of IRT’s effect on SBP, while BMI, interval duration, and frequency significantly moderated its effect on DBP (p < 0.05 for all). Meta-regression showed that SBP reduction was associated with age, female proportion, and training intensity (%MVC), with each 10% MVC increase in intensity linked to a ~ 2 mmHg SBP and ~ 1.3 mmHg MAP reduction in the range 10–60% MVC. For DBP, age was the only significant predictor. Conclusion: IRT was efficacious in reducing resting SBP, DBP, and MAP in individuals with pre-hypertension to established hypertension. The antihypertensive effects of IRT may be moderated by factors such as age, sex, medication status, baseline BP, and training variables (e.g., intensity, modality, recovery), underscoring the need for individualized and well-controlled applications in practice and research. A protocol recommends IRT at 30–60% MVC (gradually increase) or wall squat IRT at approximately 85%-95% HRpeak, performed 3–5 sessions per week for 14 min per session (4 × 2 min contractions with 2 min recovery).

Introduction: This study investigated whether stepwise load reduction training (SLRT) yields comparable or superior effects to medium load resistance training (MLRT) on one-repetition maximum (1RM) barbell back squat, thigh circumference (TC), muscle endurance (ME), counter movement jump (CMJ) performance, and acute blood lactate (BL) levels.Methods: Thirty healthy, physically active males completed both the SLRT and MLRT protocols in a crossover design to assess acute blood lactate responses firstly. Then they were randomly assigned to SLRT, MLRT, or control (CON) groups using a sealed envelope method for an 8 weeks intervention. Anthropometric data were collected at baseline. Performance metrics (1RM, TC, ME, and CMJ) were measured at baseline, week 4, and post intervention. Blinding was not feasible due to the visible nature of interventions. To minimize bias, testing was conducted by staff not involved in training, with standardized warm-ups and protocols applied across groups. Training volume, frequency and assessment timing were matched between SLRT and MLRT. Participants were instructed to avoid other structured training, and adherence was monitored weekly. Results: The results showed that both SLRT and MLRT significantly improved 1RM and ME, but SLRT produced greater gains. No significant differences were observed in TC. Additionally, SLRT led to significantly better CMJ performance and higher BL levels at immediate, 4th, 7th, and 9th minutes post exercise. The CON group performed significantly worse on all long-term outcomes compared to both SLRT and MLRT. While both SLRT and MLRT effectively enhance muscle strength, SLRT yields superior improvements in 1RM, ME, CMJ performance, and acute BL accumulation under equivalent training volumes.Discussion: These results suggest that SLRT may offer enhanced anaerobic conditioning benefits and superior adaptation potential. However, the findings should be interpreted with consideration of certain limitations, including the homogeneity of the sample and the relatively short intervention duration.

Objective: This study systematically examined the effects of recreational football on body composition and cardiometabolic health in overweight or obese individuals via subgroup analyses of potential moderators. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across six databases (PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang Data) in May and July 2025 to identify controlled trials evaluating recreational football among overweight or obese individuals. A meta-analysis was performed to pool the effect estimates, reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs), with heterogeneity explored through subgroup analyses. Results: Recreational football interventions across 32 studies (1126 participants, aged 11–68) led to significant improvements in body composition and cardiometabolic health. The training programs ranged from 4 to 48 weeks, with sessions lasting 4 to 30 min. Key body composition outcomes included reductions in body weight (SMD = −0.51), body mass index (SMD = −0.41), body fat percentage (SMD = −0.53), fat mass (SMD = −0.40), and waist circumference (SMD = −1.43), along with increases in lean body mass (SMD = 0.18). The effects were more pronounced in females and younger participants (≤18 years). Cardiometabolic benefits included reductions in systolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.59), diastolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.75), and mean arterial pressure (SMD = −0.91), as well as resting heart rates (SMD = −0.85), especially among females, obese males, and those subject to shorter rest intervals. Participants’ peak oxygen uptake also improved (SMD = 0.81). Concerning lipid metabolism, participants’ total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides decreased significantly, particularly in females, younger and obese individuals, and those who trained more than twice per week. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly only in females and those involved in frequent training. In regard to glucose metabolism, participants’ fasting insulin declined (SMD = −0.47), especially in regard to programs exceeding 12 weeks, whereas no significant changes were observed in fasting blood glucose, glycated hemoglobin, or the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance. According to the GRADE assessments, the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate across these outcomes. Conclusions: Recreational football improves the body composition and cardiometabolic health in overweight or obese individuals, resulting in reductions in adiposity, blood pressure, lipids, and insulin, with greater benefits observed in females, younger individuals, and those engaging in more frequent training. These findings support its potential as a practical intervention for weight and cardiometabolic risk management, in both clinical and community settings.

Introduction: Plyometric training (PT) is widely used in team sports, but its outcome-specific effects in female team sport athletes and the influence of key programming variables remain unclear. Methods: This systematic review and three-level meta-analysis examined the effects of PT on strength, jumping, sprinting, throwing, and agility in female team sport athletes and explored whether training frequency, intervention duration, and ground contacts per session moderated these effects. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials were identified through database searches and manual screening. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis with cluster-robust variance estimation was performed. Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions examined potential moderators, and certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Thirty-six studies involving 921 participants were included. Results: PT significantly improved vertical jump (SMD = 0.67), horizontal jump (SMD = 0.70), sprint (SMD = -0.85), throwing (SMD = 0.91), and agility (SMD = -1.09). Effects on strength were inconsistent ( p = 0.0025), with improvements in upper-body (SMD = 1.09) but not lower-body strength (SMD = 0.08). Competitive level moderated agility outcomes, whereas age was not a consistent moderator. Meta-regression showed no clear associations of training frequency, intervention duration, or ground contacts per session with performance changes. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Discussion/conclusion: PT can be an effective training strategy for improving multiple outcomes in female team sport athletes, particularly jumping, sprinting, throwing, and agility. However, adaptations appear outcome-specific, and evidence is insufficient to identify programming variables that consistently influence outcomes. Further studies with larger and more diverse samples are needed. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261328856 , identifier CRD420261328856.