Relationship and Training Effects of Horizontal Multi-Step Jumps on Sprint Performance: A Systematic Review

<b>Background:</b> This systematic review examined the relationship between horizontal multi-step jumps and sprint performance, and whether training interventions including these exercises improve sprinting. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic literature search was conducted in SPORTDiscus and PubMed (MEDLINE) and included English-language studies of athletes aged ≥14-15 years that assessed at least one horizontal multi-step jump and reported sprint outcomes over distances up to 100 m. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using design-appropriate critical appraisal tools. Of 316 records identified, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria (10 intervention studies and 9 correlational studies). <b>Results:</b> Across correlational studies, horizontal multi-step jump performance showed associations ranging from weak to very large with sprint performance, with the strongest relationships typically observed during acceleration (≤20-30 m). In trained sprinters, correlations were often large to very large (r ≈ -0.65 to -0.88), whereas team-sport athletes showed more moderate associations, and younger or less specialized populations showed weak or non-significant relationships. Across intervention studies, horizontal multi-step jump training generally improved short-distance sprint performance, with the largest improvements reported for acceleration (up to ~7-12% in some studies), while effects at longer sprint distances and maximal-speed performance were smaller, inconsistent, or not different from comparison training. <b>Conclusions:</b> Overall, the evidence suggests that the association between horizontal multi-step jumps and sprint performance is strongest during the acceleration phase and is influenced by athlete population and training status. Horizontal multi-step jumps appear to be useful for assessing and potentially developing sprint acceleration. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity in study design and variable methodological quality, and associations with maximal sprint speed are less consistent across studies.