Plyometric Training on Sand vs Firm Ground in Young Adults (PST-SF)

March 23, 2026 updated by: Mohamed Chedly Jlid, University of Manouba

Influence of Training Surface (Firm Ground vs Sand) on Neuromuscular Performance, Dynamic Postural Balance, and Muscle Soreness Following Plyometric Training in Young Active Males

Summary

The purpose of this interventional study is to determine whether the type of training surface used during plyometric training influences neuromuscular performance, dynamic postural balance, and muscle soreness in young active males. The main questions this study aims to answer are:

  • Does plyometric training performed on sand improve dynamic postural balance more than training performed on a firm surface?
  • Does plyometric training performed on sand reduce lower-limb muscle soreness compared with training performed on a firm surface?

Researchers will compare a firm-ground plyometric training group, a sand-surface plyometric training group, and a control group to evaluate the effects of training surfaces on physical performance and recovery.

Participants will:

  • Perform plyometric training sessions three times per week for eight weeks (experimental groups).
  • Complete performance tests, including vertical jumps, sprint tests, change-of-direction speed tests, and the Y-Balance Test, before and after the intervention.
  • Report perceived lower-limb muscle soreness following training sessions.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Detailed Description

This prospective randomised controlled study investigates the effects of plyometric training performed on two different training surfaces (firm ground vs sand) on neuromuscular performance, dynamic postural balance, and lower-limb muscle soreness in young active males. Participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups: a firm-ground plyometric training group, a sand-based plyometric training group, or a control group that continues regular activities without additional training.

The intervention lasts eight weeks, with three supervised training sessions per week for the experimental groups. The plyometric training program includes multidirectional exercises, such as forward bounding jumps, lateral hurdle jumps, and forward hurdle jumps, with progressive increases in training volume throughout the intervention.

Neuromuscular performance is evaluated using the standing long jump, squat jump, countermovement jump, sprint tests (10 m and 20 m), and a change-of-direction speed test (T-test). Dynamic postural balance is assessed using the Y-Balance Test for both dominant and non-dominant stance legs. Lower-limb muscle soreness is recorded after each training session using a 7-point Likert scale.

Pre- and post-intervention assessments are conducted to determine the effects of training surfaces on performance outcomes, balance adaptations, and perceived muscle soreness.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

57

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Manouba
      • Manouba, Manouba, Tunisia, 2010
        • Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Said, University of Manouba

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Male university students aged between 19 and 20 years
  • Physically active and regularly participating in practical sport science activities
  • Free from lower-limb injuries during the previous six months
  • Provided written informed consent to participate in the study

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Presence of any musculoskeletal injury affecting the lower limbs or lower back
  • Any neurological or balance disorder that could affect test performance
  • Participation in another structured strength or plyometric training program during the study period
  • Failure to complete the training intervention or testing sessions

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Basic Science
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Sand-Surface Plyometric Training
Participants performed a multidirectional plyometric training program on dry sand three times per week for eight weeks.
Participants performed a multidirectional plyometric training program on dry sand three times a week for eight weeks. The training sessions included forward bounding jumps, lateral hurdle jumps, and forward hurdle jumps with progressive increases in training volume throughout the intervention period.
Other Names:
  • Sand-Based Plyometric Training
Active Comparator: Firm-Ground Plyometric Training
Participants performed a multidirectional plyometric training program on a firm surface three times a week for eight weeks.
Participants performed a multidirectional plyometric training program on dry sand three times a week for eight weeks. The training sessions included forward bounding jumps, lateral hurdle jumps, and forward hurdle jumps with progressive increases in training volume throughout the intervention period.
Other Names:
  • Sand-Based Plyometric Training
No Intervention: control group
Participants continued their usual activities and did not perform additional plyometric training during the eight-week study period.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Squat Jump (SJ) height (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after the 8-week training intervention
Squat Jump height is measured in centimeters using the Optojump infrared optical measurement system. The mean of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after the 8-week training intervention
Change in Countermovement Jump (CMJ) height (cm)
Time Frame: Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
The countermovement jump height was measured in centimetres using the Optojump infrared optical measurement system. The mean of three trials will be used for analysis.
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Standing Long Jump distance (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Standing long jump performance is measured as horizontal jump distance in centimetres. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in 10-meter sprint time (s)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Sprint performance was measured as the time in seconds to complete the 10-meter split using photoelectric timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in 20-meter sprint time (s)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Sprint performance was measured as the time in seconds to complete the 20-metre sprint using photoelectric timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in T-test time (s)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change-of-direction speed is measured as the time in seconds it takes to complete the T-test using electronic timing gates. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test anterior reach distance on the dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal anterior reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test posteromedial reach distance on the dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal posteromedial reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test posterolateral reach distance on the dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance is assessed as a maximal posterolateral reach distance on the dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test anterior reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance assessed as maximal anterior reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test posterolateral reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance was assessed as maximal posterolateral reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimetres. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Change in Y-Balance Test posteromedial reach distance on the non-dominant leg (cm)
Time Frame: Baseline and after 8 weeks
Dynamic postural balance assessed as maximal posteromedial reach distance on the non-dominant leg, measured in centimeters. The best of three trials will be used for analysis.
Baseline and after 8 weeks
Mean lower-limb muscle soreness score (7-point Likert scale)
Time Frame: After each training session over 8 weeks
Lower-limb muscle soreness was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale after each plyometric training session. The mean score across all training sessions will be used for analysis.
After each training session over 8 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Mohamed UM jlid, Assoc. Prof., University Manouba
  • Principal Investigator: Salah Mohammed Abuzaid, University Manouba

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

September 1, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

November 15, 2024

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 14, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 17, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

March 24, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 27, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 23, 2026

Last Verified

March 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • PTU-19012026

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

Individual participant data will not be publicly shared to protect participant confidentiality.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Lower Limb Injuries

Clinical Trials on Plyometric Training on Sand

Subscribe