Systematic review shows agility training improves performance in team sports, indicating the need for tailored approaches in players' training.
Agility, characterized by rapid whole-body movement in response to external stimuli, is a key performance determinant in team sports owing to its reliance on perception-action coupling. Despite its importance, existing evidence on training effects is disproportionately focused on change-of-direction ability, overlooking the perceptual-cognitive demands of true agility. This systematic review therefore sought to quantify the effects of agility-specific training, examine moderators and establish dose-response model in team-sport players, while accounting for perception-action coupling. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed for peer-reviewed English-language studies. Risk of bias was appraised using a modified Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and study quality was evaluated via a tailored PEDro scale. Effect size (ES) was calculated using Hedge’s g, and dependencies among multiple ESs within studies were addressed through three-level meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses and both linear and non-linear meta-regressions were performed to examine potential moderators and establish dose-response models. Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 26 contributed 53 ESs to quantitative analyses. Agility training produced a large improvement in reactive agility test (RAT) performance (ES = 0.65, p < 0.01), a moderate improvement in pre-planned agility test (PAT) performance (ES = 0.55, p < 0.01), and a non-significant moderate effect in reaction test (RT) outcomes (ES = 0.52, p > 0.05). Training effects were moderated by participants’ characteristics, with junior athletes (ES = 0.77, p < 0.05) and national level athletes (ES = 0.80, p < 0.05) demonstrating greater responses. However, female and mix-gender samples were underrepresented, and the evidence base was dominated by studies in soccer and basketball. Dose-response modelling revealed a curvilinear relationship between training duration and RAT (QM = 11.64, p < 0.01), peaking at 7-8 weeks and a positive linear association between training frequency and RAT (β = 0.172, p < 0.01). No significant relationship was observed between session time and RAT (p > 0.05), although most positive ESs clustered around 20-25 minutes per training session. Agility training exerts a large overall effect on RAT performance in team-sport players, with outcomes moderated by age and training status. Interventions of 7-8 weeks delivered at higher frequency (> 3 times/week) with 20-25 minutes session duration are frequently associated with favorable adaptions. These recommendations, however, should be interpreted cautiously given the moderate-to-low certainty of evidence, high within-study variability, dominance of soccer and basketball samples and potential risk of publication bias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: