Back to all available

Acute and long-term effects of hip thrust training on athletic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

kinesiology
sports-injury
sports-medicine

Abstract

Background. The hip thrust (HT) is a popular exercise due to its high gluteal activation, but its transfer to athletic performance remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the acute and long-term effects of HT training on athletic performance in healthy individuals.

Methods. Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search of six electronic databases was conducted to identify controlled trials. Data from 20 studies assessing the effects of HT training on strength, acceleration, and jump performance were synthesized using random-effects models to calculate pooled Hedges' g effect sizes (ES).

Results. Acutely, the HT induced a moderate post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) in subsequent sprint performance (ES = 0.55), an effect dependent on recovery duration (≥4 minutes) and training volume (multiple sets). Long-term HT training produced significant improvements in HT strength (ES = 0.53), linear acceleration sprint (ES = 0.31), and change of direction (COD) speed (ES = 0.25); this sprint improvement was particularly pronounced in adolescent athletes (<18 years) (ES = 0.50). However, these benefits did not transfer to squat strength or jumping performance.

Conclusions. The evidence establishes the HT not as a universally superior training modality, but as a specialized tool for developing exercise-specific strength and horizontal force production. Within a comprehensive athletic development program, it should be considered an essential complement to, rather than a replacement for, traditional vertically-oriented exercises. Registration. This review was registered on the OSF platform, registration number https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AYFK3

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].