After reading the titles, abstracts and full text, 28 articles were selected for data extraction. The initial literature search resulted in 4982 studies. To assess the quality of the studies, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) was used. There was no time limit for the selection of articles. To be included in the review, the studies had to be available as full text, be clinical trials focusing on epidemiological injuries of resistance training. The last search was performed on March 2023. The searches were performed in the PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science, electronic databases using the Medical Subject Headings terms "Resistance training" or "Strength training" or "Crossfit" or “Weightlifting” or “Powerlifting” combined (AND) with "Injury" or "Injuries" or "Sprain" AND “Incidence” or “Prevalence” AND “Epidemiology” or “Epidemiological” in the title or abstract. This systematic review followed the PRISMA recommendations and was registered in PROSPERO with the number CRD42021257010. Also, it ascertained the characteristics of the injured subjects, the level of severity of the injuries and what definitions of injuries the available studies use. This study wished to verify which RT is safest in terms of injury prevalence and incidence. Several different aerobic training methods have emerged in combination with or as a substitute for traditional RT. The combination of resistance training (RT) and aerobic training is believed to achieve the best effects.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |