Cargando…

Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance

Analyzing vertical jumps performed on a force plate can be useful for the strength and conditioning professional in managing neuromuscular fatigue. The purpose of this study was to compare different movement thresholds when analyzing countermovement (CJ) and squat jump (SJ) performance. Twenty-one c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barefoot, Madeleine, Lamont, Hugh, Smith, J. Chadwick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783824/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36548490
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports10120193
_version_ 1784857664954564608
author Barefoot, Madeleine
Lamont, Hugh
Smith, J. Chadwick
author_facet Barefoot, Madeleine
Lamont, Hugh
Smith, J. Chadwick
author_sort Barefoot, Madeleine
collection PubMed
description Analyzing vertical jumps performed on a force plate can be useful for the strength and conditioning professional in managing neuromuscular fatigue. The purpose of this study was to compare different movement thresholds when analyzing countermovement (CJ) and squat jump (SJ) performance. Twenty-one college-aged participants (9 female, 12 male) performed five CJs and five SJs. Movement initiation was identified when the vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) deviated five standard deviations (5SD), four standard deviations, (4SD), 2.5% of system weight (2.5%SW), and 10% of system weight (10%SW) from their starting position. For CJs, movement was determined when the VGRF deviated either above or below these thresholds (5SDAB, 4SDAB, 2.5%SWAB, 10%SWAB) and was compared to when VGRF deviated below these thresholds (5SDB, 4SDB, 2.5%SWB, 10%SWB) in terms of peak force (Fmax), net impulse (netIMP), braking impulse (brIMP), propulsive impulse, jump height (JHT), peak power (Pmax), peak velocity (Vmax), and RSImod. For SJs, movement was determined when VGRF initially rose above these thresholds (5SD, 4SD, 2.5%SW, and 10%SW) for Fmax, netIMP, JHT, and Vmax. Significant differences were observed among several methods except for Fmax. However, these differences were small. All CJ measures demonstrated good-to-excellent relative reliability (ICC: 0.790–0.990) except for netIMP for 2.5%SWAB (ICC: 0.479). All methods demonstrated good absolute reliability as measured by percent coefficient of variation (CV%) except brIMP and RSImod. This may be due to instructions given to each jumper as well as skill level. For SJs, no differences in Fmax or netIMP were found across all methods. Small differences were seen for JHT, Pmax, and Vmax across several methods. All methods produced acceptable CV% (<10%) and excellent ICCs (0.900–0.990). However, some jumpers produced CV% that was greater than 10% when determining JHT for 5SD, 4SD, and 2.5%SW methods. This could be due to our method of obtaining system weight. Based on our findings, we recommend using the 10%SW method for assessing SJ performance on a force plate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9783824
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97838242022-12-24 Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance Barefoot, Madeleine Lamont, Hugh Smith, J. Chadwick Sports (Basel) Article Analyzing vertical jumps performed on a force plate can be useful for the strength and conditioning professional in managing neuromuscular fatigue. The purpose of this study was to compare different movement thresholds when analyzing countermovement (CJ) and squat jump (SJ) performance. Twenty-one college-aged participants (9 female, 12 male) performed five CJs and five SJs. Movement initiation was identified when the vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) deviated five standard deviations (5SD), four standard deviations, (4SD), 2.5% of system weight (2.5%SW), and 10% of system weight (10%SW) from their starting position. For CJs, movement was determined when the VGRF deviated either above or below these thresholds (5SDAB, 4SDAB, 2.5%SWAB, 10%SWAB) and was compared to when VGRF deviated below these thresholds (5SDB, 4SDB, 2.5%SWB, 10%SWB) in terms of peak force (Fmax), net impulse (netIMP), braking impulse (brIMP), propulsive impulse, jump height (JHT), peak power (Pmax), peak velocity (Vmax), and RSImod. For SJs, movement was determined when VGRF initially rose above these thresholds (5SD, 4SD, 2.5%SW, and 10%SW) for Fmax, netIMP, JHT, and Vmax. Significant differences were observed among several methods except for Fmax. However, these differences were small. All CJ measures demonstrated good-to-excellent relative reliability (ICC: 0.790–0.990) except for netIMP for 2.5%SWAB (ICC: 0.479). All methods demonstrated good absolute reliability as measured by percent coefficient of variation (CV%) except brIMP and RSImod. This may be due to instructions given to each jumper as well as skill level. For SJs, no differences in Fmax or netIMP were found across all methods. Small differences were seen for JHT, Pmax, and Vmax across several methods. All methods produced acceptable CV% (<10%) and excellent ICCs (0.900–0.990). However, some jumpers produced CV% that was greater than 10% when determining JHT for 5SD, 4SD, and 2.5%SW methods. This could be due to our method of obtaining system weight. Based on our findings, we recommend using the 10%SW method for assessing SJ performance on a force plate. MDPI 2022-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9783824/ /pubmed/36548490 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports10120193 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Barefoot, Madeleine
Lamont, Hugh
Smith, J. Chadwick
Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title_full Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title_fullStr Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title_short Comparison of the Reliability of Four Different Movement Thresholds When Evaluating Vertical Jump Performance
title_sort comparison of the reliability of four different movement thresholds when evaluating vertical jump performance
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783824/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36548490
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports10120193
work_keys_str_mv AT barefootmadeleine comparisonofthereliabilityoffourdifferentmovementthresholdswhenevaluatingverticaljumpperformance
AT lamonthugh comparisonofthereliabilityoffourdifferentmovementthresholdswhenevaluatingverticaljumpperformance
AT smithjchadwick comparisonofthereliabilityoffourdifferentmovementthresholdswhenevaluatingverticaljumpperformance