ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT07826104Updated Sep 18, 2026

Microdosed Versus Conventional Plyometric Training in Adolescent Basketball Players

An interventional study of Microdosed Plyometric Training and Conventional Plyometric Training in Athletic Performance, sponsored by Chongqing Normal University. Completed at 1 site in China. Open to male participants aged 12 Years to 16 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-18.

Sponsored by Chongqing Normal University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 5 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Apr 2026, registered Sep 2026).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
12 Years to 16 Years
Sex
Male
01

Study summary

This randomized controlled trial compared microdosed and conventional plyometric training in adolescent male basketball players. Forty participants aged 12-16 years were randomly assigned to either a microdosed training group or a conventional training group for 8 weeks. Both groups performed the same plyometric exercises and completed the same weekly training volume of 240 ground contacts. The microdosed group completed six sessions per week with 40 ground contacts per session, whereas the conventional group completed two sessions per week with 120 ground contacts per session. The study evaluated changes in jump performance, reactive strength, sprint performance, agility, and body composition.

The study was completed before registration on ClinicalTrials.gov and is being registered retrospectively for transparency.

Read the detailed description

This study was an 8-week, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial designed to compare the effects of microdosed and conventional plyometric training in adolescent male basketball players.

Forty male basketball players aged 12-16 years were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to a microdosed training group (MT, n=20) or a conventional training group (CT, n=20). Both groups continued their regular basketball training and performed the same plyometric exercises, including ankle hops, hurdle jumps, and drop jumps.

The total weekly plyometric training volume was matched between groups. The MT group completed six sessions per week with 40 ground contacts per session, whereas the CT group completed two sessions per week with 120 ground contacts per session. Therefore, both groups completed 240 ground contacts per week and 1,920 ground contacts over the 8-week intervention. Exercise technique, hurdle height, box height, and recovery intervals were standardized between groups.

Outcomes were assessed before and after the intervention. These included body mass, body fat percentage, countermovement jump height and concentric peak power, squat jump height and concentric peak power, eccentric utilization ratio, drop jump height, reactive strength index, three-quarter-court sprint time, and hexagon test completion time.

This study was completed before registration on ClinicalTrials.gov. Therefore, this record represents a retrospective registration based on the completed study protocol and collected study data.

02

Conditions studied

  • Athletic Performance

Keywords

  • Microdosed Plyometric Training
  • Conventional Plyometric Training
  • Adolescent Basketball Players
  • Explosive Power
  • Speed
  • Agility
  • Reactive Strength
  • Jump Performance
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Chongqing Normal University is the lead sponsor of 5 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
12 Years to 16 Years
Sexes eligible
Male
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Male adolescent basketball players aged 12-16 years.
  • Regular participation in organized basketball training.
  • No lower-limb injury within the previous 3 months.
  • No systematic plyometric training within the previous 6 months.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Injury or illness that prevented continued participation in the study.
  • Participation in additional structured lower-limb training during the intervention.
  • Failure to complete either the PRE or POST assessments.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
40 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Microdosed Plyometric Training

    Participants completed six plyometric training sessions per week for 8 weeks, with 40 ground contacts per session and 240 ground contacts per week. The training included ankle hops, hurdle jumps, and drop jumps, in addition to regular basketball training.

    Other: Microdosed Plyometric Training

  • Active comparator
    Conventional Plyometric Training

    Participants completed two plyometric training sessions per week for 8 weeks, with 120 ground contacts per session and 240 ground contacts per week. The training included ankle hops, hurdle jumps, and drop jumps, in addition to regular basketball training.

    Other: Conventional Plyometric Training

Interventions

  • OtherMicrodosed Plyometric Training

    The intervention lasted 8 weeks. Participants completed six sessions per week with 40 ground contacts per session. Each session included ankle hops (2 sets × 10 repetitions), hurdle jumps over 70-cm hurdles (3 sets × 5 repetitions), and drop jumps from a 50-cm box (5 repetitions). Participants rested for 30 seconds between sets of ankle hops and hurdle jumps and 15 seconds between drop-jump repetitions. The total weekly volume was 240 ground contacts.

  • OtherConventional Plyometric Training

    The intervention lasted 8 weeks. Participants completed two sessions per week with 120 ground contacts per session. Each session included ankle hops (6 sets × 10 repetitions), hurdle jumps over 70-cm hurdles (9 sets × 5 repetitions), and drop jumps from a 50-cm box (15 repetitions). Participants rested for 30 seconds between sets of ankle hops and hurdle jumps and 15 seconds between drop-jump repetitions. The total weekly volume was 240 ground contacts.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Countermovement Jump Height

    Countermovement jump height was assessed using two portable three-dimensional force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz. Participants performed three valid maximal countermovement jumps with 60 seconds of rest between trials. The trial with the greatest jump height was retained for analysis. Jump height was recorded in centimeters (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  2. Change in Countermovement Jump Concentric Peak Power

    Countermovement jump concentric peak power was assessed using two portable three-dimensional force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz. Participants performed three valid maximal countermovement jumps with 60 seconds of rest between trials. Concentric peak power was recorded in watts (W).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  3. Change in Squat Jump Height

    Squat jump height was assessed using two portable three-dimensional force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz. Participants started from a stationary squat position with approximately 90 degrees of knee flexion and jumped vertically without a preparatory countermovement. Three valid trials were completed with 60 seconds of rest, and the trial with the greatest jump height was retained. Jump height was recorded in centimeters (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  4. Change in Squat Jump Concentric Peak Power

    Squat jump concentric peak power was assessed using two portable three-dimensional force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz. Participants completed three valid squat jumps with 60 seconds of rest between trials. Concentric peak power was recorded in watts (W).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  5. Change in Drop Jump Height

    Drop jump height was assessed using two portable three-dimensional force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz. Participants stepped from a 50-cm box, landed on the force plates, and immediately performed a maximal vertical rebound jump while attempting to minimize ground-contact time. Three valid trials were completed with 60 seconds of rest. Jump height was recorded in centimeters (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Reactive Strength Index

    Reactive strength index was assessed during the drop jump test and calculated by dividing drop jump height in meters by ground-contact time in seconds. Three valid trials were completed, and the trial with the highest reactive strength index was retained for analysis. Reactive strength index was expressed in meters per second (m/s).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  2. Change in Eccentric Utilization Ratio

    The eccentric utilization ratio was calculated by dividing countermovement jump height by squat jump height. Higher values indicate a greater contribution of the stretch-shortening cycle to jump performance.

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  3. Change in Three-Quarter-Court Sprint Time

    Three-quarter-court sprint performance was assessed over 22.86 meters using an electronic timing-gate system. Participants started from a stationary split stance 0.5 meters behind the starting line and sprinted maximally through the finish line. Three trials were completed with 3 minutes of rest, and the fastest time was retained. Sprint time was recorded in seconds (s).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  4. Change in Hexagon Test Completion Time

    Agility was assessed using the hexagon test. Participants completed three clockwise circuits by jumping with both feet across each side of a hexagon and returning to the center while maintaining the same body orientation. Three valid trials were completed with 2 minutes of rest, and the fastest completion time was retained. Time was recorded in seconds (s).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  5. Change in Body Mass

    Body mass was assessed using a multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analyzer (InBody 270). Participants were assessed barefoot and wearing light sports clothing after emptying their bladder. Body mass was recorded to the nearest 0.1 kilogram (kg).

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

  6. Change in Body Fat Percentage

    Body fat percentage was assessed using a multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analyzer (InBody 270). Participants were assessed barefoot and wearing light sports clothing after emptying their bladder. Body fat percentage was recorded to the nearest 0.1%.

    Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 8-week intervention

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Chongqing University of Education
    Chongqing, Chongqing Municipality 400065, China
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Individual participant data will not be shared publicly. No formal IPD-sharing plan was established for this study, and participant confidentiality will be protected.

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Apr 2026 to primary completion in Jun 2026, 2 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 12, 2026
First posted
Sep 17, 2026
StartActual
Apr 6, 2026
Primary completionActual
Jun 13, 2026
CompletionActual
Jun 14, 2026
Last update
Sep 18, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 18, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07826104
Lead sponsor
Chongqing Normal University
Responsible party
Chao Wang (Master's Student, Chongqing Normal University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 17, 2026
Start date
Apr 6, 2026
Primary completion
Jun 13, 2026
Completion
Jun 14, 2026
Last update
Sep 18, 2026

Study contacts

Ao Xiang
principal investigator · Chongqing University of Education

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion