Repeated Sprint Training In Youth Athletes

In youth athletes, repeated sprint training was associated with pooled gains in short sprint speed, change-of-direction performance, and best repeated-sprint ability, while several other measures were unchanged. This pattern came from a meta-analysis combining eight studies with 193 participants aged 13 to 18 years. The authors reported an average PEDro score of 5.75 and described the included trials as having overall fair-to-good methodological quality. Results were presented in terms of where benefits appeared and where outcomes remained unchanged.

Across studies, repeated sprint training protocols varied in duration, weekly frequency, sets, repetitions, intensity, and rest structure. Reported averages were 6.75 weeks of training and about two sessions per week, though individual programs ranged more widely. Control groups continued standard physical education curricula or conventional training methods in the included comparisons. Investigators reported statistically significant pooled improvements in 10-meter sprint and change-of-direction outcomes; the pooled 20-meter sprint effect was significant in the primary analysis but became non-significant in sensitivity analysis when one study was excluded. Together, these results represented the clearest speed-oriented signal within the pooled analysis of youth training interventions.

Repeated-sprint ability outcomes were more specific, with benefits concentrated in a single performance indicator. The authors reported a significant pooled effect for best repeated-sprint ability, but not for mean repeated-sprint performance or sprint decrement. Heterogeneity was described as relatively low for best repeated-sprint ability, whereas sprint decrement showed greater variability across contributing studies. Overall, the repeated-sprint findings were mixed across the different repeated-effort outcomes.

Countermovement jump and maximum aerobic performance did not show significant pooled differences, in contrast to the more favorable speed-related results. Leave-one-out testing showed the 20-meter sprint result became non-significant when Uthoff et al. was removed, although the effect direction stayed the same. RSAdec was also sensitive to exclusion of a single study, but it remained non-significant after that change in the pooled estimate. These stability checks suggested some pooled signals were more consistent than others within the available evidence.

Only two included studies reported biological maturation, which limited the authors’ ability to examine maturity as a moderator across the full set of studies. This limitation applied alongside the overall fair-to-good methodological quality described for the included trials. Most pooled outcomes therefore reflected evidence without comparable maturity reporting or a shared developmental reference point. Incomplete maturity reporting narrowed what the investigators could report about differences across developmental stages.

Key Takeaways

• In this meta-analysis of youth athletes, repeated sprint training showed statistically significant pooled differences versus control for 10-meter sprint, change-of-direction, and RSAbest outcomes; the 20-meter sprint finding was sensitive to study exclusion.
• Pooled differences were not significant for countermovement jump, maximum aerobic performance, mean repeated-sprint performance, or sprint decrement.
• Some findings were sensitive to single-study exclusion, and limited maturity reporting constrained assessment of developmental-stage differences.