Cargando…
Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance
This study examined the relationship between subjective ratings of overall wellness and neuromuscular performance throughout a 6-week intensive offseason strength and conditioning program. Thirty experienced NCAA Division II baseball players completed all phases of the program. A comprehensive welln...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Berkeley Electronic Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6355136/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30761203 |
_version_ | 1783391303388626944 |
---|---|
author | BRASCH, MICHAEL T. NEELD, KEVIN L. KONKOL, KRISTEN F. PETTITT, ROBERT W. |
author_facet | BRASCH, MICHAEL T. NEELD, KEVIN L. KONKOL, KRISTEN F. PETTITT, ROBERT W. |
author_sort | BRASCH, MICHAEL T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study examined the relationship between subjective ratings of overall wellness and neuromuscular performance throughout a 6-week intensive offseason strength and conditioning program. Thirty experienced NCAA Division II baseball players completed all phases of the program. A comprehensive wellness rating and 5 countermovement jumps (CMJ5) were measured and averaged for 4 phases of training. Pre- and post-testing measures of strength and speed also were evaluated. Internal consistency of the wellness rating for each phase ranged α = 0.77–0.92, and CMJ5 velocities had decent consistency (ICC(α) = 0.88, TE = 0.19 m·s(−1), CV = 5.90%). The training program evoked significant (p < 0.01) improvements in front squats (d = 0.55), trap bar deadlifts (d = 0.62), chin ups (d = 0.39), 30-yd dash (d = 0.39), with no change in the 300-yd dash (p > 0.05), where d is the treatment effect size. Average CMJ5 velocities (m·s(−1)) were similar for the preparation phase (1.90 ± 0.25), eccentric phase (1.91 ± 0.28), strength & power phase (1.91 ± 0.24), and recovery phase (1.91 ± 0.30; F = 0.04, p = 0.99, η(p)(2) = 0.001). No significant correlations were observed for pre-or post-testing measures of wellness ratings in comparison to any performance measures, including a composite standardized score from each performance test at pre-testing (r = 0.22, p = 0.26). The CMJ5 exhibited too high of a typical error to determine a change in neuromuscular status. Additionally, the wellness rating did not reflect changes in relation to performance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6355136 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Berkeley Electronic Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63551362019-02-11 Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance BRASCH, MICHAEL T. NEELD, KEVIN L. KONKOL, KRISTEN F. PETTITT, ROBERT W. Int J Exerc Sci Original Research This study examined the relationship between subjective ratings of overall wellness and neuromuscular performance throughout a 6-week intensive offseason strength and conditioning program. Thirty experienced NCAA Division II baseball players completed all phases of the program. A comprehensive wellness rating and 5 countermovement jumps (CMJ5) were measured and averaged for 4 phases of training. Pre- and post-testing measures of strength and speed also were evaluated. Internal consistency of the wellness rating for each phase ranged α = 0.77–0.92, and CMJ5 velocities had decent consistency (ICC(α) = 0.88, TE = 0.19 m·s(−1), CV = 5.90%). The training program evoked significant (p < 0.01) improvements in front squats (d = 0.55), trap bar deadlifts (d = 0.62), chin ups (d = 0.39), 30-yd dash (d = 0.39), with no change in the 300-yd dash (p > 0.05), where d is the treatment effect size. Average CMJ5 velocities (m·s(−1)) were similar for the preparation phase (1.90 ± 0.25), eccentric phase (1.91 ± 0.28), strength & power phase (1.91 ± 0.24), and recovery phase (1.91 ± 0.30; F = 0.04, p = 0.99, η(p)(2) = 0.001). No significant correlations were observed for pre-or post-testing measures of wellness ratings in comparison to any performance measures, including a composite standardized score from each performance test at pre-testing (r = 0.22, p = 0.26). The CMJ5 exhibited too high of a typical error to determine a change in neuromuscular status. Additionally, the wellness rating did not reflect changes in relation to performance. Berkeley Electronic Press 2019-01-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6355136/ /pubmed/30761203 Text en |
spellingShingle | Original Research BRASCH, MICHAEL T. NEELD, KEVIN L. KONKOL, KRISTEN F. PETTITT, ROBERT W. Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title | Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title_full | Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title_fullStr | Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title_full_unstemmed | Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title_short | Value of Wellness Ratings and Countermovement Jumping Velocity to Monitor Performance |
title_sort | value of wellness ratings and countermovement jumping velocity to monitor performance |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6355136/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30761203 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT braschmichaelt valueofwellnessratingsandcountermovementjumpingvelocitytomonitorperformance AT neeldkevinl valueofwellnessratingsandcountermovementjumpingvelocitytomonitorperformance AT konkolkristenf valueofwellnessratingsandcountermovementjumpingvelocitytomonitorperformance AT pettittrobertw valueofwellnessratingsandcountermovementjumpingvelocitytomonitorperformance |