The Effect of Two Speed Endurance Training Regimes on Performance of Soccer Players

In order to better understand the specificity of training adaptations, we compared the effects of two different anaerobic training regimes on various types of soccer-related exercise performances. During the last 3 weeks of the competitive season, thirteen young male professional soccer players (age 18.5±1 yr, height 179.5±6.5 cm, body mass 74.3±6.5 kg) reduced the training volume by ~20% and replaced their habitual fitness conditioning work with either speed endurance production (SEP; n = 6) or speed endurance maintenance (SEM; n = 7) training, three times per wk. SEP training consisted of 6–8 reps of 20-s all-out running bouts followed by 2 min of passive recovery, whereas SEM training was characterized by 6–8 x 20-s all-out efforts interspersed with 40 s of passive recovery. SEP training reduced (p<0.01) the total time in a repeated sprint ability test (RSA_t) by 2.5%. SEM training improved the 200-m sprint performance (from 26.59±0.70 to 26.02±0.62 s, p<0.01) and had a likely beneficial impact on the percentage decrement score of the RSA test (from 4.07±1.28 to 3.55±1.01%) but induced a very likely impairment in RSA_t (from 83.81±2.37 to 84.65±2.27 s). The distance covered in the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery test level 2 was 10.1% (p<0.001) and 3.8% (p<0.05) higher after SEP and SEM training, respectively, with possibly greater improvements following SEP compared to SEM. No differences were observed in the 20- and 40-m sprint performances. In conclusion, these two training strategies target different determinants of soccer-related physical performance. SEP improved repeated sprint and high-intensity intermittent exercise performance, whereas SEM increased muscles’ ability to maximize fatigue tolerance and maintain speed development during both repeated all-out and continuous short-duration maximal exercises. These results provide new insight into the precise nature of a stimulus necessary to improve specific types of athletic performance in trained young soccer players.     

A Multicenter,Randomized, Controlled Trial of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment on Preterms

BackgroundDespite some preliminary evidence, it is still largely unknown whether osteopathic manipulative treatment improves preterm clinical outcomes.ResultsA total of 695 newborns were randomly assigned to either the study group (n= 352) or the control group (n=343). A statistical significant difference was observed between the two groups for the primary outcome (13.8 and 17.5 days for the study and control group respectively, p<0.001, effect size: 0.31). Multivariate analysis showed a reduction of the length of stay of 3.9 days (95% CI -5.5 to -2.3, p<0.001). Furthermore, there were significant reductions with treatment as compared to usual care in cost (difference between study and control group: 1,586.01€; 95% CI 1,087.18 to 6,277.28; p<0.001) but not in daily weight gain. There were no complications associated to the intervention.ConclusionsOsteopathic treatment reduced significantly the number of days of hospitalization and is cost-effective on a large cohort of preterm infants.