Broad-spectrum physical fitness benefits of recreational football: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

background A previous meta-analysis showed that maximal oxygen uptake increased by 3.51 mL/ kg/min (95% CI 3.07 to 4.15) during a recreational football programme of 3-6 months in comparison with continuous moderate-intensity running, strength training or a passive control group. In addition, narrative reviews have demonstrated beneficial effects of recreational football on physical fitness and health status. Objective The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the magnitude of effects of recreational football on blood pressure, body composition, lipid profile and muscular fitness with reference to age, gender and health status. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Google Scholar were searched prior to 1 February 2017. In addition, Google Scholar alerts were set up in January 2012 to identify potential papers with the following key terms: recreational football, recreational soccer, street football and street soccer. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised and matched controlled trials with participants allocated to a recreational football group or any other type of exercises or passive control group were included. Training programmes had to last at least 2 weeks to meet the inclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures were blood pressure, resting heart rate, body composition, muscular fitness, and blood lipids and glucose tolerance. A total of 31 papers met the inclusion criteria and were included. Results The effect of recreational football on systolic blood pressure (SBP) versus no-exercise controls was most likely extremely largely beneficial (effect size (ES)=4.20 mm Hg; 95% CI 1.87 to 6.53). In addition, a most likely very large beneficial (ES=3.89 mm Hg; 95% CI 2.33 to 5.44) effect was observed for diastolic blood pressure (DBP), when compared with non-active groups. Furthermore, a most likely extremely large beneficial effect was shown for SBP and DBP in participants with mild hypertension (11 and 7 mm Hg decrease, respectively) and participants with prehypertension (10 and 7 mm Hg decrease, respectively). Meta-analysis of recreational football determined the impact on resting heart rate as most likely extremely largely beneficial (ES=6.03 beats/min; 95% CI 4.43 to 7.64) when compared with non-active groups. The observed recreational football effect on fat mass was most likely largely beneficial (ES=1.72 kg; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.58) and the effect on countermovement jump (CMJ) performance was most likely very largely beneficial (ES=2.27 cm; 95% CI 1.29 to 3.25) when compared with non-active groups. Possibly beneficial decreases were found in low-density lipoprotein levels (ES=0.21 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.36). Possibly largely beneficial effect was observed for DBP in comparison with continuous running training. Small harmful and unclear results were noted for SBP, fat and lean body mass, body mass index, as well as muscu...

Exercise training in overweight and obese children: Recreational football and high‐intensity interval training provide similar benefits to physical fitness

“…Recently, Oliveira et al 14 confirmed that group sports, mainly recreational football, improve body composition, cardiorespiratory fitness, and muscular fitness in overweight and obese children. In this regard, a growing number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses [15][16][17][18] have highlighted the utility of recreational football as a useful form of exercise training because of the intensity elicited [80%-85% of maximal heart rate (HR max )] and movement patterns experienced (~100 high-intensity runs). In turn, it is well established that recreational football induces a range of positive effects on physical fitness including lowering hypertension in middle-aged men and women, improving cardiovascular and metabolic responses in patients with type 2 −1.98, −0.12; P = .031) and the HIIT group (Yo-Yo: 81.2%, ES = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.15, 1.92; P = .025, change-of-direction speed: −5.4%, ES = −0.91; 95% CI: −1.79, −0.04; P = .045).…”

“…physical fitness, running, small-sided games, soccer diabetes, enhancing heart function, increasing physical capacity, improving muscle mass in prostate cancer patients, and increasing bone mineral density and mass. 17 In contrast, only two studies 19,20 have investigated the long-term effects of recreational football on physical fitness in obese boys with the authors concluding recreational football has the potential to prevent and reduce childhood obesity and associated health consequences. Moreover, recreational football has been shown to significantly improve health-related fitness, self-esteem, perceived physical competence, and attraction to physical activity, while PE classes had no effect on these measures.…”

The “Football is Medicine” platform—scientific evidence, large‐scale implementation of evidence‐based concepts and future perspectives

“…However, as of the early 2000s investigations into the fitness and health effects of football were initiated. 2 The evidence regarding the application of football as a health-enhancing activity for the general population is currently expanding rapidly with more than 150 scientific articles published over the last 10 years in 35 peer-reviewed international journals, including three metaanalyses, [9][10][11] three narrative reviews, 3-5 three special issues on Football for Health [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] and one on football, basketball, team handball, and other team sports. 20 The overall conclusions are summarized in the "Football is Medicine"-model, integrating sports science, sport training physiology, sports medicine, sports psychology and sports sociology results (Figure 1).…”

“…With regard to research dissemination, there will be a focus on research articles and special issues in high-quality peer-reviewed international journals, like the present issue, with audio-visual coverage of the main results, including these, and with evidencebased popular articles, booklets and books published for the general population as well as healthcare workers and authorities. With regard to implementation there will be emphasis on global dissemination of evidence-based concepts with football training for children (FIT FIRST 7,8 and 11 for Health 6,8 ) and sedentary adults and patient groups (Football Fitness [2][3][4][5][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] ), but also evidence-based programmes using, for example, elite football clubs to promote healthy diet and everyday life physical activity for fans (FFIT 23 /EuroFIT 24 ). For such large-scale implementation plans to succeed, a close collaboration is required between important stakeholders in the scientific community, the football governing bodies, the worldwide health organizations and national authorities.…”

There are more football injury prevention reviews than randomised controlled trials. Time for more RCT action!

“…Football is the most popular sport worldwide, and participation in football at any level is associated with numerous health benefits 1. However, participation in football at any level incurs a risk of sustaining musculoskeletal injuries 2 3.…”